DOCSLIB.ORG

<I>Un Ecart Infime</I> (Part I): Foucault's Critique of the Concept of Lived-Experience

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
<I>Un Ecart Infime</I> (Part I): Foucault's Critique of the Concept of Lived-Experience RIPh 35_f1_8-28 8/2/05 2:37 PM Page 11 UN ECART INFIME (PART I): FOUCAULT’S CRITIQUE OF THE CONCEPT OF LIVED-EXPERIENCE (VÉCU ) by LEONARD LAWLOR The University of Memphis ABSTRACT In this essay, I start from Foucault’s last text, his “Life: Experience and Science.” Speaking of Canguilhem, Foucault makes a distinction between “le vécu” (lived-expe- rience) and “le vivant” (the living). I then examine this difference between “le vécu” (lived-experience) and “le vivant” (the living); that is, I examine the different logics, we might say, of immanence that each concept implies. To do this, I reconstruct the “cri- tique” that Foucault presents of the concept of vécu in the ninth chapter of The Order of Things (Les Mots et les choses): “Man and His Doubles.” I try to show how this cri- tique applies to the early Merleau-Ponty, the Merleau-Ponty of the Phenomenology of Perception. Then, I construct the positive logic of Foucault’s relation of immanence by means of another text, which is contemporaneous with Les Mots et les choses: This is not a Pipe. The critique of the concept of vécu is based on the fact that the relationship in vécu is a mixture (un mélange) that closes “un écart infime.” Conversely, Foucault’s con- ception of the relationship in “le vivant” is one that dissociates and keeps “l’écart infime” open. At the end, I suggest, through three “landmarks,” how Foucault’s cri- tique might be applied to the later Merleau-Ponty. This essay is Part I of a trilogy on Merleau-Ponty and Foucault. Part II concerns Merleau-Ponty’s “mixturism,” while Part III concerns “the blind spot” in Foucault. These three texts complete the work necessary to open the problem of memory and life. At the end of his life in 1984, Foucault revised the introduction he had written in 1978 for the English translation of Georges Canguilhem’s The Normal and the Pathological. Foucault gave no title to the original introduction, but in 1984 he gave it the simple title: “Life: Experience and Science.”1 Here, Foucault tried to show that Canguilhem “wants to re-discover... what of the concept is in life” (VES, 773–74/475; Foucault’s emphasis). For Canguilhem, but also for Foucault himself as well, we must think that the concept is immanent in—“dans”—life.2 What is at issue in immanence is the logic of this relation between concept and life. Now, clearly, one could just as well say that phe- nomenology consists in the immanence of the concept in life. Yet, just Research in Phenomenology,35 © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands 2005 Downloaded from Brill.com10/01/2021 08:30:01AM via free access RIPh 35_f1_8-28 8/2/05 2:37 PM Page 12 12 as clearly, Foucault thinks that what Canguilhem was doing with the concept of life was radically different from the phenomenological con- cept of life. In fact, this is what Foucault says at the end of his revised introduction: “It is to this philosophy of sense, of the subject, of lived- experience [le vécu] that Canguilhem has opposed a philosophy of error, of the concept, of the living [le vivant] as another way of approaching the notion of life” (VES, 776/477). Now what I intend to do here is examine this difference between “le vécu”3 (lived-experience) and “le vivant” (the living); that is, I intend to examine the different logics, we might say, of immanence that each concept implies. To do this, I am going to reconstruct the “critique” that Foucault presents of the concept of vécu in the ninth chapter of The Order of Things (Les Mots et les choses): “Man and His Doubles.”4 Then, I am going to construct the positive logic of Foucault’s relation of immanence by means of another text, which is contemporaneous with Les Mots et les choses: This is not a Pipe.5 As we are going to see, the critique of the concept of vécu is based on the fact that the relationship in vécu is a mixture (un mélange) that closes “un écart infime.” Conversely, Foucault’s concep- tion of the relationship—here we must use the word “vivant”—in “le vivant” is one that dissociates and keeps “l’écart infime” open. Perhaps I will give my conclusion away if I say that, for Deleuze—whom we must also keep in mind here—immanence is defined by a kind of dualism, a dualism that “is a preparatory distribution within a plural- ism,” within, in other words, a multiplicity.6 I. Lived-Experience ( le vécu) in Merleau-Ponty In chapter nine, Foucault names no particular philosopher when he criticizes the concept of vécu. But we know from “Life: Experience and Science” that, for Foucault, the side of the subject and le vécu refers to phenomenology, and more particularly, to Sartre and Merleau- Ponty. Thus, it is probable that Foucault, in chapter nine, is thinking of the early Merleau-Ponty, the Merleau-Ponty of the Phenomenology of Perception.7 Foucault’s use of the word “écart” also makes us think of the Merleau-Ponty of The Visible and the Invisible. Below, I shall turn to the later Merleau-Ponty. But here at the beginning, we are going to remain with the Merleau-Ponty of the Phenomenology of Perception for the time being.8 On the very first page of the Phenomenology of Perception, Merleau-Ponty speaks of le vécu, and throughout the Phenomenology the word modifies the word monde, “world.” For example, in the chapter Downloaded from Brill.com10/01/2021 08:30:01AM via free access RIPh 35_f1_8-28 8/2/05 2:37 PM Page 13 ’ - 13 called “The Phenomenal Field,” Merleau-Ponty says that “the first philosophical act therefore would be that of returning to the lived- world on this side of the objective world” (PhP, 69/57).9 Yet, he uses the word as a noun—“le vécu”—only twice. The first time occurs in the chapter called “Space”; here he says “lived-experience [le vécu] is really lived by me . ., but I can live more things that I can think of [ plus de choses que je m’en représente]. What is only lived is ambivalent” (PhP, 343/296; my emphasis). For Merleau-Ponty, ambivalence is the crucial characteristic of vécu. And this characteristic guides his analy- sis of intersubjectivity in the Phenomenology of Perception, which is where he uses “le vécu” for the second time, in the chapter called “Others and the Human World.” Here “le vécu” is defined by self-givenness (PhP, 411/358); but, this self-givenness is also given (PhP, 413/360). In other words, the active is also passive. In this formula we can see the importance of the positive affirmation in the “is.” This positive affirmation is the heart of ambivalence. Now, these two uses of “le vécu” in the Phenomenology of Perception depend of course on Merleau-Ponty’s appro- priation of Husserl’s concept of Fundierung.10 In the chapter called “The Cogito,” Merleau-Ponty speaks of the relation between founding (le fon- dant) and founded (le fondé) as one that is “equivocal” (équivoque), since “every truth of fact is a truth of reason, every truth of reason is a truth of fact” (PhP, 451/394; my emphasis).11 Merleau-Ponty also says that the relation of matter and form is a relation of Fundierung: “The form integrates the content to the point that it appears to end up being a simple mode of the form . but reciprocally... the content remains as a radical contingency, as the first establishment or the foun- dation of knowledge and action.... It is this dialectic of form and content that we have to restore...” (PhP, 147–48/127). We can now summarize what we see in Merleau-Ponty’s concept of “le vécu.” For Merleau-Ponty, “le vécu” is ambivalent or equivocal—it is, we could say, a mixture, un mélange—because the content of experience, le sol, as Merleau-Ponty also says, becomes, is integrated into, the form of expression. This relation would have to be formulated as a positive affirmation; the copula indicates the sameness of things related. We know, however, that the logic of the Fundierung relation in Merleau- Ponty is not yet complete. Since he calls it a dialectic, it must involve some sort of negation. We shall return to the question of negation in a moment. Now let us turn to Foucault’s critique of the concept of vécu in Les Mots et les choses.12 Downloaded from Brill.com10/01/2021 08:30:01AM via free access RIPh 35_f1_8-28 8/2/05 2:37 PM Page 14 14 II. The Analysis of Lived-Experience (Vécu) Is a Discourse with a Mixed Nature It is well known that this chapter—chapter nine, “Man and His Doubles”—contains Foucault’s critique of modern humanism. The chapter therefore focuses on man (and not on the human being). Foucault defines man, of course, as a double; he is at once an object of knowledge and a subject that knows (MC, 323/312). Man (and again not the human being) is what occupies, as Foucault says, this “ambigu- ous position.” The entire critique of humanism unfolds, for Foucault, from this designation of man as “ambiguous,” a designation that recalls Merleau-Ponty (but perhaps not Sartre, at least not the Sartre that Merleau-Ponty portrays in Adventures of the Dialectic). For Foucault, the ambiguity consists in two senses of finitude. In one sense, finitude con- sists in the empirical positivities, the empirical contents of “work, life, and language,” which tell man that he is finite (MC, 326/315).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2012 SPEP Program (Rochester
    SOCIETY FOR PHENOMENOLOGY AND EXISTENTIAL PHILOSOPHY Executive Co-Directors Anthony Steinbock, Southern Illinois University Carbondale Amy Allen, Dartmouth College Executive Committee Amy Allen, Dartmouth College Alia Al-Saji, McGill University Fred Evans, Duquesne University Brian Schroeder, Rochester Institute of Technology Anthony Steinbock, Southern Illinois University Carbondale Shannon Mussett, Utah Valley University, Secretary-Treasurer Graduate Assistant Christopher C. Paone, Southern Illinois University Carbondale Advisory Book Selection Committee Shannon Winnubst, The Ohio State University, Chair Ann V. Murphy, Fordham University Brad Elliott Stone, Loyola Marymount University Adrian Johnston, University of New Mexico David Carr, Emory University Brent Adkins, Roanoke College Daniela Vallega-Neu, Univeristy of Oregon James D. Hatley, Salisbury University Advocacy Committee Robin James, University of North Carolina Charlotte, Chair Peter Gratton, Memorial University of Newfoundland Gail Weiss, George Washington University Committee on the Status of Women Laura Hengehold, Case Western Reserve University, Chair Shannon Sullivan, The Pennsylvania State University Elaine Miller, Miami University of Ohio Racial and Ethnic Diversity Committee Falguni Sheth, Hampshire College, Chair Hernando Estévez, John Jay College/CUNY Devonya Havis, Canisius College LGBTQ Advocacy Committee Robert Vallier, Institut d’Études Politiques, Chair William Wilkerson, University of Alabama Huntsville Mary Bloodsworth-Lugo, Washington State University Webmaster Christopher P. Long, The Pennsylvania State University Local Arrangements Contacts Brian Schroeder, local contact and organizer, [email protected] Scott Campbell, book exhibit coordinator, [email protected] Lindsey Johnson, student volunteer coordinator, [email protected] All SPEP sessions will be held at the Rochester Riverside Convention Center (RRCC) on 123 East Main St., Rochester, NY. The RRCC is adjacent to the host hotel, the Hyatt Regency Rochester, to which it is connected by an enclosed skyway.
    [Show full text]
  • TED TOADVINE Curriculum Vitae Department of Philosophy 1247 W
    TED TOADVINE Curriculum Vitae Department of Philosophy 1247 W. 14th Avenue University of Oregon Eugene, OR 97402 Eugene, OR 97403-1295 Phone: (541) 731-7984 Phone: (541) 346-5554 Email: [email protected] Fax: (541) 346-5544 Revised 27 May 2016 SPECIALIZATION Contemporary continental philosophy, especially phenomenology and post-structuralism Philosophy of nature and environment COMPETENCE Aesthetics, philosophy of ecology, nineteenth-century philosophy, ancient Greek philosophy EDUCATION • Brevet d’Études Françaises, 5ème degré, Institut de Touraine, Tours, France, 2002 • Ph.D. in Philosophy, The University of Memphis, 1996 Contradiction, Expression, and Chiasm: The Development of Intersubjectivity in Maurice Merleau-Ponty Committee: Leonard Lawlor (Director), Robert Bernasconi, Tina Chanter, Mark Timmons, Fred Evans (Duquesne) • M.A. in Philosophy, The University of Memphis, 1995 • B.A. in Philosophy with General Honors, Salisbury University, 1990 ACADEMIC POSITIONS • Professor of Philosophy & Environmental Studies, University of Oregon, 2015– • Research Associate, Environmental Studies Program, Oberlin College, 2015–2016 • Associate Professor of Philosophy and Environmental Studies, University of Oregon, 2009–2015 • Visiting Associate Professor of Environmental Studies, Oberlin College, 2010–2011 • Assistant Professor of Philosophy and Environmental Studies, University of Oregon, 2003–2009 • Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Emporia State University, 1998–2003 • Visiting Professor of Philosophy, Kalamazoo College, 1997–1998 ADMINISTRATIVE
    [Show full text]
  • Immanence 2017
    Repositorium für die Medienwissenschaft Leonard Lawlor Immanence 2017 https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/1957 Veröffentlichungsversion / published version Sammelbandbeitrag / collection article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Lawlor, Leonard: Immanence. In: Mercedes Bunz, Birgit Mara Kaiser, Kathrin Thiele (Hg.): Symptoms of the planetary condition. A critical vocabulary. Lüneburg: meson press 2017, S. 61–65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/1957. Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Creative Commons - This document is made available under a creative commons - Namensnennung - Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 4.0 Attribution - Share Alike 4.0 License. For more information see: Lizenz zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu dieser Lizenz https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0 finden Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0 Immanence Leonard Lawlor Since the time of Immanuel Kant, philosophers, and cultural theorists (like Friedrich Nietzsche) have always engaged in immanent critique. Most generally and negatively, immanent critique criticizes on the basis of no transcendent idea or value. Immanent critique therefore is undoubtedly a kind of relativism. We must not be afraid of relativism. Depending on no transcen­ dent value, immanent critique depends on immanence itself. Immanent critique then looks to be paradoxical. It is. Immanent critique is a difficult idea. It means a critique that does not appeal to a transcendent or other worldly value or idea. It is a critique that remains within experience but is done in the name of a different kind ofexperience such as responsibility (Deleuze 1983, 91–93). In order to start to understand the immanence found in immanent critique, we must distinguish immanence from apparently related forms of thinking such as materialism and naturalism.
    [Show full text]
  • Responsibility 2017
    Repositorium für die Medienwissenschaft Leonard Lawlor Responsibility 2017 https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/1706 Veröffentlichungsversion / published version Sammelbandbeitrag / collection article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Lawlor, Leonard: Responsibility. In: Mercedes Bunz, Birgit Mara Kaiser, Kathrin Thiele (Hg.): Symptoms of the planetary condition. A critical vocabulary. Lüneburg: meson press 2017, S. 127– 133. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/1706. Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Creative Commons - This document is made available under a creative commons - Namensnennung - Weitergabe unter gleichen Bedingungen 4.0 Attribution - Share Alike 4.0 License. For more information see: Lizenz zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu dieser Lizenz https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0 finden Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0 Responsibility Leonard Lawlor The most tangible reason that philosophers in the twentieth century have devoted themselves to the reformulation of the concept of responsibility lies in the extreme violence of the con­ temporary world. A piece of evidence for this claim lies in the fact that Emmanuel Levinas dedicates his Otherwise than Being or Beyond Essence “to the memory of those who were closest to the six million assassinated by the National Socialists” (1981). Levinas is not alone in attempting to rethink responsibility. Jacques Derrida and Gilles Deleuze have also devoted a lot of their thinking to the problem of responsibility (Derrida 1998, 26; Del­ euze 1983, 85; Deleuze and Guattari 1994, 108–109). When these philosophers criticize contemporary political and philosophical ideas, the critique frequently calls for others to be responsible, and more responsible.
    [Show full text]
  • 387 Leonard Lawlor Early Twentieth
    Philosophy in Review XXXII (2012), no. 5 Leonard Lawlor Early Twentieth-Century Continental Philosophy. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press 2012. 296 pages $80.00 (cloth ISBN 978–0–253–35702–1); $27.95 (paper ISBN 978–0– 253–22372–2) Over the past ten years, Leonard Lawlor has published numerous works in twentieth-century continental philosophy, primarily focusing on the French side of things. This current book is intended to serve as a “general introduction” (vii) to continental philosophy. It stems from a course on recent continental philosophy that Lawlor has taught several times. This is a good thing, because the reader benefits from Lawlor’s long familiarity with the texts that he treats here. Clearly, this is material he has covered with students many times. This is not a book for beginners only, however, for the overall argument Lawlor pursues—that there is a unified philosophic project at the heart of continental philosophy and what this, consequently, implies— is essential for anyone in the field to consider and take seriously. In addition to an introduction and conclusion, the book is divided into seven chapters, each about 25–30 pages long. Also included are two helpful appendices, further explicating complex but key concepts (‘immanence’ and ‘trait’) that function throughout the text. Each of the seven chapters treats a relatively brief original text (20–40 pages) by Husserl, Heidegger, or Foucault, for example. First, Lawlor gives a summary of the original text that aims to be more or less straightforward explication. This is then followed by a shorter section of explicit textual interpretation that extends the explication in what can be described as a creative appropriation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cambridge Foucault Lexicon Editors Leonard Lawlor and John Nale Frontmatter More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-11921-4 - The Cambridge Foucault Lexicon Editors Leonard Lawlor and John Nale Frontmatter More information THE CAMBRIDGE FOUCAULT LEXICON The Cambridge Foucault Lexicon is a reference tool that provides clear and incisive defi nitions and descriptions of all of Michel Foucault’s major terms and infl uences, including history, knowledge, language, philosophy, and power. It also includes entries on philosophers about whom Foucault wrote and who infl uenced his thinking, such as Deleuze, Heidegger, Nietzsche, and Canguilhem. The entries are written by scholars of Foucault from a variety of disciplines such as philosophy, gender studies, political science, and history. Together, they shed light on concepts key to Foucault and to ongoing discus- sions of his work today. Leonard Lawlor is Sparks Professor of Philosophy at the Pennsylvania State University. He is the author of This Is Not Suffi cient: An Essay on Animality and Human Nature in Derrida and Early Twentieth-Century Continental Philosophy and is co-editor (with Ted Toadvine) of The Merleau-Ponty Reader . John Nale earned his PhD in philosophy from the Pennsylvania State University. He is currently Visiting Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University of North Florida. © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-11921-4 - The Cambridge Foucault Lexicon Editors Leonard Lawlor and John Nale Frontmatter More information © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org
    [Show full text]
  • Husserl and Foucault on the Subject: the Companions Harry Nethery IV
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Duquesne University: Digital Commons Duquesne University Duquesne Scholarship Collection Electronic Theses and Dissertations 2013 Husserl and Foucault on the Subject: The Companions Harry Nethery IV Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/etd Recommended Citation Nethery, H. (2013). Husserl and Foucault on the Subject: The ompC anions (Doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University). Retrieved from https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/974 This Immediate Access is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. For more information, please contact [email protected]. HUSSERL AND FOUCAULT ON THE SUBJECT: THE COMPANIONS A Dissertation Submitted to the McAnulty College & Graduate School of Liberal Arts Duquesne University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Harry A. Nethery IV August 2013 Copyright by Harry A. Nethery IV 2013 HUSSERL AND FOUCAULT ON THE SUBJECT: THE COMPANIONS By Harry A. Nethery IV Approved July 11th, 2013 ________________________________ ________________________________ Dr. Lanei Rodemeyer Dr. Leonard Lawlor Assistant Professor of Philosophy Professor of Philosophy (Committee Chair) (Committee Member) ________________________________ ________________________________ Dr. Fred Evans Dr. Daniel Selcer Professor of Philosophy Associate Professor of Philosophy (Committee Member) (Committee Member) ________________________________ ________________________________ Dr. James Swindal Dr. Ronald Polansky Dean, McAnulty College of Liberal Arts Chair, Department of Philosophy Professor of Philosophy Professor of Philosophy iii ABSTRACT HUSSERL AND FOUCAULT ON THE SUBJECT: THE COMPANIONS By Harry A. Nethery August 2013 Dissertation supervised by Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Leonard Lawlor | 93 Form of Conditions for Questions, for “Further Questions,” Hence the Title of My Essay
    Further Questions A Way Out of the Present Philosophical Situation (via Foucault) Leonard Lawlor Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy - Revue de la philosophie française et de langue française, Vol XIX, No 1 (2011) pp 91-105 Vol XIX, No 1 (2011) ISSN 1936-6280 (print) ISSN 2155-1162 (online) DOI 10.5195/jffp.2011.481 http://www.jffp.org This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. This journal is operated by the University Library System of the University of Pittsburgh as part of its D-Scribe Digital Publishing Program, and is co-sponsored by the University of Pittsburgh Press Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy | Revue de la philosophie française et de langue française Vol XIX, No 1 (2011) | jffp.org | DOI 10.5195/jffp.2011.481 Further Questions A Way Out of the Present Philosophical Situation (via Foucault) Leonard Lawlor Pennsylvania State University Let us begin by assembling some signs of the present philosophical situation. On the one hand, the most important living French philosopher, Alain Badiou, calls for a “return to Plato,” despite the movement of anti- Platonism that dominated French and German thought in the 20th century.1 On the other hand, the present moment sees a resurgence of naturalism in philosophy in general (including and especially Anglophone analytic philosophy), despite the criticisms of naturalism that have appeared throughout the 20th century. Phenomenology seems to be at the center of both of these movements. On the one hand, it is the idea of a mathematized ontology that requires the return to Plato, a mathematized ontology constructed without a reflection on its transcendental grounds.
    [Show full text]
  • Harry A. Nethery IV, Ph.D
    Harry A. Nethery IV, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Philosophy Department of Religion and Philosophy Florida Southern College 111 Lake Hollingsworth Dr. Lakeland, FL 33801 EDUCATION Ph.D. Duquesne University, Philosophy, 2013 Dissertation Title: Husserl and Foucault on the Subject: The Companions Dr. Lanei Rodemeyer (Director), Dr. Leonard Lawlor, Dr. Fred Evans, Dr. Daniel Selcer M.A. University of Memphis, Philosophy, 2005 B.A. Humboldt State University, Philosophy, 2003 AREA OF SPECIALIZATION Contemporary Continental Philosophy Critical Theories of Race AREAS OF COMPETENCE Ethics (including History of Ethics, Environmental Ethics, Medical Ethics, Analytic, and Continental) Social and Political Philosophy History of Philosophy PUBLICATIONS “Husserl and Racism at the Level of Passive Synthesis” in the Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology. Routledge. URL: (https://doi.org/10.1080/00071773.2018.1451218) “Author” entry for The Cambridge Foucault Lexicon. Ed. Leonard Lawlor and John Nale. Cambridge University Press, 2014 “Jay-Z, Phenomenology, and Hip-Hop” in the APA Newsletter on Philosophy and the Black Experience, Vol. 11, Issue 1, Fall 2012 “Book Review: Towards an Epistemology of Ruptures by Arun Iyer” in the Notre Dame Philosophy Review, 2014 Link: ndpr.nd.edu/news/54986-towards-an-epistemology-of-ruptures-the-case-of-heidegger-and- foucault/ “Book Review: Husserl by David Woodruff Smith” in the International Journal of Philosophical Studies, Vol. 16, Issue 5, 2008 WORKS IN PROGRESS Race and Experience (Book Manuscript) PRESENTATIONS
    [Show full text]
  • Vulnerability and Violence: on the Poverty of the Remainder (Or Beyond Kant)
    Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology ISSN: 0007-1773 (Print) 2332-0486 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rbsp20 Vulnerability and Violence: On the Poverty of the Remainder (or Beyond Kant) Leonard Lawlor To cite this article: Leonard Lawlor (2018) Vulnerability and Violence: On the Poverty of the Remainder (or Beyond Kant), Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology, 49:3, 217-228, DOI: 10.1080/00071773.2018.1434967 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00071773.2018.1434967 Published online: 06 Feb 2018. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 207 View Crossmark data Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rbsp20 THE JOURNAL OF THE BRITISH SOCIETY FOR PHENOMENOLOGY 2018, VOL. 49, NO. 3, 217–228 https://doi.org/10.1080/00071773.2018.1434967 Vulnerability and Violence: On the Poverty of the Remainder (or Beyond Kant) Leonard Lawlor Department of Philosophy, Penn State University, University Park, USA ABSTRACT KEYWORDS This article tries to show the irreducible connection between Phenomenology; Derrida; vulnerability and violence. This connection leads us back to the Kant; time; violence ethical level of experience. If vulnerability makes violence irreducible, then at least two reactions to violence are possible. On the one hand, a reaction is possible in which one attempts to negate vulnerability in order to close down the very thing within us that allows violence to enter. This negative reaction is actually the worst violence. On the other hand, a reaction is possible in which one attempts to affirm vulnerability, even though its affirmation opens us to the violence that will happen.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael Naas Curriculum Vitae
    1 Michael Naas Curriculum Vitae DePaul University Department of Philosophy 2352 N. Clifton Ave. Chicago, IL 60614 [email protected] Teaching Appointments • DePaul University, Professor, 2001 to present. • DePaul University, Associate Professor, 1996 to 2001. • DePaul University, Assistant Professor, 1990 to 1996. • New York University, Lecturer, 1989-90. Administrative Positions • Department Chairperson, Philosophy, 2001-2, 2010-16. • Director of Graduate Studies, Philosophy, 1995-2000, 2002-3. • Director of Undergraduate Studies, Philosophy, 1994-95, 2004-5. • Program Director, Foreign Study, Athens, spring 1994 & 1998. • Program Director, Foreign Study, Paris, spring 1999 & 2004. Education Ph.D. State University of New York at Stony Brook. May, 1990. Dissertation: Turning: From Persuasion to Philosophy, Hugh J. Silverman (Director), Mary C. Rawlinson, David B. Allison, Pietro Pucci (Cornell University). D.E.A. Diplôme d’Études Approfondies, Université de Paris I (Sorbonne), 1987. Thesis: “Le ton de la critique chez Maurice Blanchot,” Director: Olivier Revault d’Allonnes. Seminars: Jacques Derrida, Julia Kristeva, Françoise Collin, Jean Cohen. Mention: Très Bien, 16/20. 2 B.A. College of the Holy Cross, Worcester, MA, 1982. Magna Cum Laude. Major: English and American literature. Honors and Awards • Commandeur dans l’Ordre des Palmes Académiques, 2015. • Spirit of Inquiry Award, DePaul University, 2012. • Distinguished Visiting Professor, University of Alberta, Canada, March 2010. • Appointed Fellow at Ph.D. Center at Chicago Theological Seminary, 2007-present. • Chevalier dans l’Ordre des Palmes Académiques, 2005. • Excellence in Teaching Award, DePaul University, 1996. • DePaul University Competitive Research Summer Grant, 1993, 1996, 1999, 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009. • DePaul University Competitive Leave Research Grant, Spring 1995, 2001, 2007, Autumn 2016-Winter 2017.
    [Show full text]
  • Title <書評>Leonard Lawlor, from Violence to Speaking Out: Apocalypse and Expression in Foucault, Derrida and Deleuze (E
    <書評>Leonard Lawlor, From Violence to Speaking Out: Title Apocalypse and Expression in Foucault, Derrida and Deleuze (Edinburgh University Press, 2016, xii+308p.) Author(s) Hammurabi, Rubio Citation 哲学論叢 (2021), 48: R1-R4 Issue Date 2021 URL http://hdl.handle.net/2433/263279 Right Type Departmental Bulletin Paper Textversion publisher Kyoto University ―――――――――――――――――― different texts included stem from Lawlor’s ――――――――Review――――――― research and expertise in the phenomenological Leonard Lawlor, From Violence to tradition (Husserl, Heidegger and Speaking Out: Apocalypse and Merleau-Ponty) and firmly dive into the Expression in Foucault, Derrida and so-called « poststructuralist » thinkers, mainly Deleuze (Edinburgh University Press, Jacques Derrida, Gilles Deleuze and Michel 2016, xii+308p.) Foucault. On this basis, it is possible to read it Hammurabi Rubio as both a commentary on phenomenological ―――――――――――――――――― and poststructuralist ideas, or as a series of From Violence to Speaking out (2016), analyses addressing, implicitly or explicitly, the subtitled Apocalypse and Expression in problem of the worst violence. For these Foucault, Derrida and Deleuze, is the latest reasons, a general reader, not particularly major publication by Leonard Lawlor, whose familiar with the thinkers discussed herein, impressive philosophical research stretches all could approach it as an interesting overview of the way from classic figures like Henri Bergson phenomenology and poststructuralism which (1859–1941) and Edmund Husserl will explore and connect somewhat familiar (1859–1938), to more contemporary concepts like epoché, temporality and philosophers such as Jacques Derrida auto-affection, with other perhaps less familiar (1930–2004) and Gilles Deleuze (1925–1995). concepts such as transcendental violence, event Indeed, Lawlor’s excellent translation of and repetition.
    [Show full text]