Mary Magdalene and Thomas
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A Touch of Doubt Studies and Texts in Scepticism Edited on behalf of the Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies by Giuseppe Veltri Managing Editor: Yoav Meyrav Editorial Board Heidrun Eichner, Talya Fishman, Racheli Haliva, Henrik Lagerlund, Reimund Leicht, Stephan Schmid, Carsten Wilke, Irene Zwiep Volume 9 A Touch of Doubt On Haptic Scepticism Edited by Rachel Aumiller The series Studies and Texts in Scepticism is published on behalf of the Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies JEWISH SCEPTICISM ISBN 978-3-11-062395-6 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-062717-6 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-062433-5 ISSN 2568-9614 DOI https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110627176 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. For details go to https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Library of Congress Control Number: 2020943768 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2021 Rachel Aumiller, published by Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Cover image: Mark Tansey, Doubting Thomas, 1986, oil on canvas, 65 x 54 inches (165.1 x 137.2 cm.) © Mark Tansey. Courtesy Gagosian Gallery, New York Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com Contents Acknowledgements 1 Rachel Aumiller Sensation &Hesitation: Haptic Scepticism as an Ethics of Touching 2 Jacob Levi “Es wirdLeib, es empfindet”:Auto-Affection, Doubt, and the Philosopher’s Hands 30 Robert Pfaller When to Touch and What to Doubt: Zeroing In on the Tactile Surplus 58 BaraKolenc The (Un)Touchable Touch of Pyramus and Thisbe: Doubtand Desire 78 Bill Rebiger AMagic Touch: PerformativeHaptic Acts in Biblical and Medieval Jewish Magic 104 Libera Pisano Noli me tangere: The Profaning Touch That Challenges Authority 122 MirtKomel TouchingDoubt: Haptolinguistic Scepticism 138 Goran Vranešević An Atom of Touch: Scepticism from Hegel to Lacan 156 Adi Louria Hayon The Weak Relations of Touch and Sight through the PassageofLapsed Time 178 List of Contributors 207 List of Figures 211 Index 213 Acknowledgements Iamgrateful to the directors of the Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies for sup- porting my research vision as amember of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft project on Jewish scepticism. Ithank the authors of this volume for their willingness to bridge traditionalscholarship, experimentalmethods, and interdisciplinary col- laboration. Iespeciallythank my colleagues from the UniversityofLjubljana—Mirt Komel and the members of TOUCHLAN—for our ongoing collaboration on the topics of language, touch, and doubt. Our communal research was made possible through the support of the Slovenian National Agencyfor Research. The collaborative thinking represented in this volume was developedoverthe course of two years through aseries of workshops and events hosted by the Univer- sity of Hamburg, the University of Ljubljana, Villanova University,and The New Schoolfor Social Research. Ithank the communities at each of these institutes for their insight and enthusiasm. Ourresearch was further enrichedbyartistic projects led by Zack Sievers and Bara Kolenc (Haptic Cinematography,see pp. 4–5) and Bara Kolenc, Mirt Komel, and Atej Tutta (Hegel’sBegriff,see p. 20). Mark Tansey has granted us permission to use the imageof“DoubtingThomas” on multiple occasions,includingfor this cover.This imagehas been asourceofcon- ceptual inspiration. Each chapter of this volume was developedthrough the support of anonymous peer reviewers, who provided us with the opportunity to refine and deepen our thinking.Iwould liketorecognise the careful attentionofthe editorial team at the MaimonidesCentre,especiallythat of Yoav Meyrav,Katharine Handel, and Mikheil Kakabadze. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110627176-001 Fig. 1: Mark Tansey, DoubtingThomas, 1986, oil on canvas, 65x54inches (165.1x137.2 cm.) ©Mark Tansey.CourtesyGagosian Gallery, New York. Rachel Aumiller Sensation &Hesitation: Haptic Scepticismas an EthicsofTouching It is said that seeing is believing. Typically, this adageistaken to mean that sight is the strongest empirical affirmation of what we believetobetrue. And yet, as the adagealsoimplies, although sight maystrengthen one’sbelief, it does not guarantee certain knowledge.Inopposition to sight,touch presents itself as proof for what is real. Touchcan serveasareality check that awakens an individual from her slumber. We pinch ourselvestoconfirm we are not dreaming. We slap acomrade across the cheek to bring him to his senses.¹ This volume traces an alliance drawnthroughout the history of Western philos- ophyand religion between belief and sight on one side and doubt/certainty and touch on the other.Ineverydayspeech, the sceptic is often associated with the figure of “Doubting Thomas”:the disbeliever with the compulsion to touch what others ac- cept on appearance alone. Whereas the dogmatist maybesatisfied with believing what she sees, the sceptic is not satisfieduntil she has thrust her finger into the very site of her uncertainty. Although the sceptic has been framed as the doubter with the compulsion to touch and thus overcomedoubt,the history of philosophical scepticism questions the reliability of the senses, giving particular attention to touch. We find sceptical ac- counts of touch in Pyrrho’smodes, which describethe inconsistencies and idiosyn- crasies of our tactile sensations (our pleasure and pain, our sense of coolness and warmth).² We mayalso consider René Descartes’ssuspicion of the parchment that he holds in his own hands (not to mention the existenceofhis ownhands), which he performs as an exerciseinscepticism.³ Other classicalsceptical arguments about touch abound: Perhaps Iamdreaming(dreamingevenofthe sensation of pinching myself awake). Perhaps Iamnot the active knower—the one who touch- es—perhaps Iaminstead the one who is touched—by spirits, by an evil genius, by illness, by madness.⁴ Throughout this chapterIalternatebetween different pronouns:she, he, they.Mypronoun choice reflects both acritical and playfulperspective on gender. Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Scepticism,trans. Julia Annas and Jonathan Barnes (Cambridge:Cam- bridge University Press,1994): haptic sensation as subjective and situational (I.56,80–87,109,210–11; II.52); haptic sensation as contradictory or paradoxical (I.91–94;III.194–97). René Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy,trans. Donald A. Cress (Indianapolis:Hackett, 1993). Plato’s Theaetetus addresses debates surroundingthe reliability of sensation in connection to the characterization of knowledge itself as adream (Plato, Theaetetus,inTheaetetusand Sophist,trans. Christopher Rowe[Cambridge:Cambridge University Press,2015], 201d8–6c2). The sceptical trope of questioningsensation as aproduct of dreams,illness, or madness stretches fromPlatonism to mod- https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110627176-002 4 Rachel Aumiller Sometimes, the sceptic openlyconfesses to her compulsion to touch or to be touched; at other times, this accusation is made against the insatiable sceptic who is not content with faith alone. This leads me to the questions that inspired the topic of this volume: How did the sceptic gain the reputation not onlyasthe doubter, but also as the toucher?Has she been falselyframed?Oristhere some truth to the characterisation of the sceptic as one who pokes holes in every dogma with which she comes into contact?Why does the sceptic getoff on sticking her hands into the sticky cracks of reason itself?Does the sceptic gether hands dirty in order to overcome her doubt, or does touchingonlycomplicatethe matter at hand further? In order to pursue these questions, the Maimonides Centre’sresearch team on JewishScepticism at the University of Hamburg joined powers with aresearch team oriented in the Ljubljana School of Psychoanalysis called “The Languageof Touch: Linguistic PerspectivesinHaptic Studies.” This most unusual collaboration gave rise to aseries of workshops and lectures held in Germany,Slovenia,and the United States.Italso inspired several unconventional research initiatives, such as an international project in philosophyand film called Haptic Cinematography and an interactive installation called Hegel’sBegriff. Our investigations led us to identify the prominent theme of touch throughout the history of philosophical scepticism and its intersections with religion, politics, art,and culture. We go so far as to claim that the theme of touch—shaped by shifting culturalattitudes towardstouching—drivesmajor shifts in the questions posed by philosophy. Andyet,despite the persistent question of touch at each philosophical stage, this key aspect of scepticism had not yetbeen named or acknowledgedin mainstream philosophical scholarship or in haptic studies. Icoin the term “haptic scepticism” to mark touchasasiteofepistemic and eth- ical questioning and crisis. Haptic scepticism denotes experiences of touch that call touch itself into question and apossible response this experience.The studyofhap- tic scepticism thus pursues two questions: What kinds of personal or shared haptic experiencesthrow us into crisis? What kinds of responses to the crisis of touchallow for transformation: the transformation of those who experience crisis, of thosewe touch, and of touch itself as amediator between self and others? In addition to “haptic scepticism,” Iintroduce “haptic dogmatism”