Phenomenology's Presence
Graduate Conference in Phenomenology, University of Sussex, UK
13th & 14th June 2013
CONFERENCE PROGRAMME
Thursday, 13th June 2013, Room: MS3.07A (Medical School - BSMS)
09:00 – 10:00 Registration and Coffee
10:00 – 10:15 Welcome address
10:20 - 11:40 Session 1: Presence and Absence in Husserlian Phenomenology
Gab l M
Chair: rie artin
er 1 James J e (C S Rese Un of Denmark Speak : ardin enter for ubjectivity arch, iversity Copehnhagen,le of Pa e) a A ce in E H l's P o
Tit per: 'Presenc nd bsen dmund usser henomenology f Empathy'
1
er 2 M o C (KU L Belg
Speakle of Pa: arc ' he avallaroPresence of theeuven, P The ium)P st of the P H erl and on the P s of F Tit per: T ast. a resence. uss Merleau -Ponty ossibilitie orgetfulness'
11:40 - 11:50 BREAK
11:50 – 13:10 Session 2: Heidegger, Language and the Ready-to-hand
C C
Chair: arolina hristofidaki
er 1 Joshua Ber ham Uni UK
Speakle of Pa: ' Presencegamin (Dur to La versity, or To ) s a H theory consciousness' Tit per: From nguage: , ward eideggerian of
er 2 Ka Kurtz lanova Un US
Speakle of Pa: therine ' to (Vile What is Siversity,n with Hearing) and List he c of L e in Be an Time' Tit per: “How Includ ee ening”: T Problemati anguag ing d
13:10 - 14:00 LUNCH
14:00 - 15:20 Session 3: Merleau-Ponty and the Phenomenology of
2
Listening
Pa L
Chair: trick evy
er 1 A n Casle (Uni ersity o Bar S
Speakle of Pa: aro ' y v l C f celona,ions inpain) the I ion W of t Car an Geor e Bures M Tit per: Phenomenologica onsiderat nstallat ork Jane diff d g iller'
er 2 C e Rob (Uni ersity o E x, U
Speakle of Pa: atherin ' ce at theb L v s of Phenf sse K) L to M John C ' Tit per: Silen imit omenology: istening erleau- Ponty and age
15:20 - 15:30 BREAK
15:30 - 16:50 Session 4: Heidegger's Appropriation of Christian Philosophy
J a E
Chair: an lsen
er 1 V Dav s (Uni ersity o
Speakle of Pa: ictoria ' he Tr ieh aboutv T f Oxford, WhatUK) is er's U Presen an Where does it C e F Tit per: T ut emporality: Heidegg nderstanding of ce, d om rom?'
er 2 J ua Roe (Uni ersity o
Speakle of Pa: osh ' he A v on off SOxford, PhiUK) in M H '
Tit per: T ppropriati cotist losophy artin eidegger
3
16:50 - 17:15 BREAK
17:15 - 18:45 Keynote Address
Robe t Be sconi (Pe S Un US
Professorle of Pa 'r he Plarna of Presencennsylvania a A tatece in Hiversity,er's) l A on of E Tit per: T y nd bsen eidegg Phenomenologica Dr Paul ppropriatis ( of Sussex,ckhart' U
Chair: . Davie University K)
Conference Dinner
4 Friday 14th June 2013, Room: Jubilee 155 (Jubilee Building)
08:30 – 09:00 Registration and Coffee
09:10 – 10:30 Session 5: Presence and Absence in Heideggerian Phenomenology
e. M C
Chair: urat elik
Speaker 1: Christos oannou (University of Sussex, UK)
le of er: he YoungHadji Hei er and the P y of e'
Tit Pap 'T degg henomenolog Desir
er 2 J Wh e River US
Speakle of Pa: ustin ' it ng(UC V Gogh'sside, S ) A Resp to
Tit per: Explaini an hoes: Heideggerian onse Schapiro'
10:30 – 10:40 BREAK
10:40 - 12:00 Session 6: Beyond Presence and Beyond Givenness?
Dimitri Kladisk
Chair: akis er 1 S s (Uni ersity C ege Du Rep ic of I
Speakle of Pa: eferin ' Jame an thev M ollsics of blin, ubl reland)
Tit per: Absence d etaphy Presence'
er 2 Mara Gr e (Un of L L
Speakle of Pa: ' s Noninfeld iveiversity Giv ss Possatvia, le?atvia) An E on of J s Resp Tit per: I -intuit enne ib valuati ean-Luc Marion' onse'
12.00 – 13:00 LUNCH
13:00 - 14.20 Session 7: Phenomenology, Ethics, and Politics
Will Rees
Chair:
er 1 Dav M í Rojas ( of S
Speakle of Pa: 'id art nez anUniversity C l T ussex, I UK)uality and uality in
Tit per: Phenomenology d ritica heory: neq Eq Ethics'
er 2 A a P escu ( of S
Speakle of Pa: lexandr ' he A opt F University M imal Coussex, UK) in Lé as a Der
Tit per: T bsen riend: in mmunity vin nd rida'
14:20 - 14:30 BREAK 14:30 - 16:00 Keynote Address
Beatrice H le ersity o E x, U
Professorle of Pa ' an-Pi A (Univ an Mf sse ssivityK) in H er's E ce F Tit per: Freedom, utonomy d edio-Pa eidegg ssen ofChair:reedom' Dr. Lewis (University of the West of England, UK)
Michael
16:00 – 17:30 BREAK
16:30 - 18:00 Closing Discussion
Discussion of the themes an f s of the co ce led b Dr Paul s ersity o Sussex, UK) in conver ion with Pr Robe t Be sconi S e U d inding US nferen y . Davie (Univ f sat ofessor r rna (Pennsylvania tat niversity, )
18:00 Closing Remarks Abstracts of Graduate Speakers
Name: Joshua Ber (D ham Uni UK
Email: gamin ur versity, )
Title of Paper: m ce to e: s a n consciousness’ ‘Fro Presen Languag or, Toward Heideggeria theory of
Abstract: ce is er's to the ce ng. tral t ng ime is e Presen a tied indelibly in Martinn Heidegges ethinking to human experien e of bei A cener's concep in Beies on anda T th 'clearing' t (Lichtung)–lies e space withine Daseine wherei entiti comoss presence. Presence is here, lik much ofhHeidegg an e in anvocabulary, en netak w very particular meaning. I imp mor than th mer occurring or coming-acr of an entity– it coming-to-be-wit ntity tirely w ay. t is this s to s s clearing ish to e this is the tre I change thein Dasein' relationship ty asan entityhingthat enter it clearingthat I w er explor here. s For change,t) I is will the hold, tral at very cen conscious of our humanity, and presencing of an enti somet in Dasein's (for Heidegg buffs, it unconcealmen cen moment of experience.
o e ce this ill egin ng out aham s ) ng on T fully his convey ay th significanng, he of moment,s ar I w b the by manteasi use Gr Harman' (2002s excitiut redefinities the of zuhandenheit, or readiness- to - allhand. T w ileof bei ill argues, extend h f his beyond hu e of equipmenton toward ends, b onsdescrib to e state of process/flux lossesthat erunderpins the entities.on Wh Iesw generally are agreenced wit man ontology, I argu thatn hisman extensi of zuhanden ill relati es areth inanimate realm g as ov out finer distincti of entiti that ut areprese so in n hu consciousness.al I hu consciousness, I w argue, entiti not only experienced frozen of their ready-to-hand being, b held i an atempor state. Re-reading ng ime h the lens al er's e ill ue this a man is Bei andle onlyT b throug lan of sever of Heidegg lectur courses, I w arg that state– and therefore, specifically hu consciousness– made possib y guage.
ill e s on nce, ss this ill e e I w conclud the n bye suggestingof the Self and that its understandingr on to the w language' relati with prese time and consciousne in way w open som fertil paths for exploring atur elati orld.
Name: n Casley ( of Bar S
Email aaAaro University celona, pain)
Title of Paper: l ons the n t Car an Geor e Bures M 'Phenomenologica Considerati in Installatio Work of Jane diff d g iller'
Abstract: is the ole the ish on s as irst What r of phenomenology as thein contemporary al theart? When Engl l translaties ere of Maurice Merleau-Ponty' t Phenomenologys es of) Perception w fs published ins 1962, New) Yorkare w les capit hat ofas art worldt and nowradica chang tow as taking place. he Rober Morris' s Box the (1961 as and Donald Judd' Reliefion Painting he(1961-1962 art examp he of wer's w a new ar practice, referred minimalism.s T primaryhe focuon of work thew upon the interact to the between t n objects andn t views using body,l and lsgreatly complimented Merleau-Ponty' a ideas. ayT transiti theaway art from mgallery the wall), andut a in galleryon space, hati art Judd' ow word ng "rea materia in real space",ncerepresented not only new w of viewing workhin the(fro bodyself. b alf anew concepti of w the should be.ionMeani nis derived solely froms the prese of the viewer, as rather thann existing intrinsically ut thewit work itt art asH centuryhing later, ands to e assimilat betwee these the early erwork has and phenomenology n theh already beeon widely discussed, b central concep of somett that neede bes physically encountered is the by viewium not gone away. to I e the installati sical work, or sound therwalks of up contemporary artists the Jane Cardiff andlex themes Georg Bur Miller, sound primary med lace through the unconsciouswhich explor are phy environments ei set on or is selected by as artists. Comp s ranging thefrom environmentalism, er identity,s p seor h the encountered,ng, and embodied percepti is positedsic the primary mean of exploring work. The view interpret the scenes throug act of imagini which Edward Casey insists an intrin feature all is the is n s as is s l ole of aesthetic experience.the si nceWhat of su absent w from work ofte a important that which present, and phenomenology play an essentia r in understanding gnifica ch ork.
Name: o C o (KU L Belg
Email: Marc avallar euven, ium)
Title of Paper: he ce the he st the l on the P s of F ‘T Presen of Past. T Pa of Presence. Husser and Merleau-Ponty ossibilitie orgetfulness’
Abstract: n this er ill e on the e me l n ill are l’s consciousnessI pap a I w tak ’s lateissu cof ti inonEdmund of an immemorHusser andl p Mauricehe tral Merleau-Ponty. issue I particular,s I w e comp Husser early theoryes of time- ill nde Merleau-Pontty to r onceptithe the ia ast. Tconsciousnesscen consciousthat bound thethese, in?som respects, oes thevery differentnce pictur the of time, Iionw a argue, shapeis tth consciousnessattemp account of thefor p presence of past: How is of past How d prese of past condithe nd er he s ons toresent? nce the to the s T title of my pap suggestl two directi Ongrasp thephenomenologically e the prese of past, as which correspondal iontwo different the view respectively embraceds by the Husser andl Merleau-Ponty.sion ones hand, th past is interpretedce theonly a tempor as modificat n of present which, l’sin turn, represent me fundamenta to eflectdimen the ofstime. a By meansicsof remembering I experiener past solely On the having bee present. Therefore,’s Husser early theory ofs ti the seems r limit the of metaphy s of presence,l as Heideggh pointed to theout. other hand, Merleau-Ponty’s different perspectivel underline theautonomous Notescharacter Theof Visiblepast andand theit Invisiblefundamenta ellpriority as wit respect ce to thepresent. sionMerleau-Ponty a past thataccount has neveof ran beenimmemoria present past, the developedPhenomenolinogy of WorkingPerception er ofa e me asesw the his early a referensics dimen he of “ l st is le” in the ivity ut alsooff is pictur of ti which overcom as a limitsion of p metaphy f pof presence.on a T henceorigina f thepa p notnceonly i unattainab for act of remembering, b considered by Merleau-Ponty condit of illossibility eor ercepti nd, the, or rese tself. l is at stake in M ’s pi e of time. I w conclud my talk by depicting notion of “transcendenta forgetfulness” which erleau-Ponty ctur Name: Dav s (Uni ersity o O U
Email: Victoria ie v f xford, K)
Title of Paper: he uth out is of Presen an Where does it C e F ‘T Tr ab Temporality: What Heidegger’s Understanding ce, d om rom?’
Abstract: is p ce s ht? o s hat is nce er st? er a er s e What nceresen in Heidegger’s thoug How d thing ngpresence, and w it that they prese to the ov againe theI off t pap s) that h addresse al the onnatur of preses to in Heidegger’ thought, hisbeginning ill in to Bei the and Time’s the Augenblick, to and isdelving the in on natur of er event is (Ereigni erwit specis focusnce, Contribution out Philosophy:ng, Of the Event. T w refer imal fissure,e leap in which ngs. realisati of whatev oi that Heidegge terms prese to coming abling ( and happeni of tru thatco-responsively, truth is n but in rthe pr it ha strif between beyng and bei Moreover, I will look t how presenc relate the unconcea aletheia) th: ot, ather, ppens.
h the ere oes e ’ the ouble on as to nce es out hat l Wit question, ‘Wh the d iteCom From? I intend’), d the meaning:ion the questi show presece com theab and fromill w primordia on structures can we understand to it ( natur ill of its ‘upon-whichess e e and the questnce of the inherited’ idea of presen and present. I w hethertouch briefly Husserl, is but ultimately look as a Kierkegaard. I w addr thhisnatur ofs inherita to of ‘the moment the fromst us Kierkegaard,o p and intouch theologon )w Kierkegaard best understood proto-phenomenologist. (T perhap addresses, some extent, at f henomenology y.
er oes ’s t ue he is e hat oes this If Heideggout d s inherit Kierkegaard momene? (ands Iuto arg does), andt if to Kierkegaardue ‘everywhers metaphysically entangled’,nce msw ad mean ab Heidegger’sics? understanding to ue of presenc th theI Cap essentially righ critiq Heidegger’ understanding of prese in terive of to themonument to metaphy I seek arg that wi appropriate articulation, phenomenology can and should offer an alternat scientific- sical h (a sical’) is a p l metaphy Weltbild, wit which certain kind of ‘post-metaphy theology otentia - unlikely - bedfellow.
Name: ara Gr e (Un of L L
Email: M infeld iversity atvia, atvia)
Title of Paper: s ive ss le? n on arion’s Resp I Non-intuit Givenne Possib A Evaluati of Jean-Luc M onse
Abstract: ile h er ion is n othesis othesis on Wh French hethink excessJean-Luc Mar er probablyion best a know for his hishyp s of “saturatedng phenomenon” n – a hyp s to of a phenomene a that is characterizedn throug t of intuitione ov intent) –, close reading of workon “Bei Given”e and “I Excess” arionallow claims introduc oth emdistinction betwee saturated phenomenonss (intuitivs givenness and phenomenonself, amely, asof revelati (non-intuitiv givenness). e M the that b of th ivitycan be characterized In as givenne thatoth show them itselfare in and from it en phenomenonhe that is cannot hile b reduced to meaning as the excessgiving act ionof subjectivity.s self other words, b on of unconditioned ng or pur givenness.s self T difference he thatm w thissaturated er phenomenon is to on the of intuit show it directly,l phenomen of revelation,ive bei non-intuitive, he showon it indirectly. T lai of pap ivequesti ess meaning and phenomenologicang the possibilityng of irectnon-intuit givenness.ion.”T questi oes of the phenomenologica possibilityess of s non-intuitself givenn? presupposes to questioni meaniess of “inds self phenomenalizat h What d it meane that unconditioned as a givenn showion it indirectly t According Marion, unconditioned on oth givennarion’s show iton only througion other phenomenales – thereforive indirectlyess – necessary th condit of phenomenality.st e I is argued ) howeverh that based b Mn descripti at isof intuit and examp of non-intuit givenn n oth(birth, deas andion istime), it lemu to baintainequated eeither 1 wit unfulfilledn meaning-ive intentioess (something as essth merelys thought)self or 2) with speculative n ideal. I b irectcase Mar notionab e m thh characterizatiother of non - intuit givenn givenn that show it in and from itself. I other words, ind phenomenalizat can b equated wit ei phenomenon that s self l hin the al ivity o the sp e i l that exceeds ex show it as intentiona object wit reduced sphere of transcendent subject r eculativ dea perience.
Name: Christos Hadj oannou (University of Sussex, UK)
Email: i
Title of Paper: he Yo H er and the of Desi
'T ung eidegg Phenomenology re'
Abstract: has ays l ion to n nce t has also n a Phenomenology the alw s paid carefu attent n the interplay betwee on presea and absence. Bu this interplay ms thebee popularn topice asof otherlack/abseapproaches, notably one stemming from Hegelia dialectics, which relied paradigm of subjectivity developed in ter of operatio of desir nce.
(and H ) phen d out of the p of see lea no sp f a n of ab ce as d Heideggerian we look usserlian the d eomenology ab e ineveloped H we n aradigm loo givenness, the mood ofmingly Angst in vingng and Timeace or(1 otion) ), orsen hisesire. lecture What isWhenever M sics (1 for) isclosure his ont of sencl a unteidegger, of the “Nothing”ormally as the k at o all d Bei (d cal) negati927 (§53 r his-say- accouat etaphy le w h929 d whercal ab ceologica a d cco Ult Angst is a ground its opef ioneterminate dif ers o ialecti f theon opeendersion of d nt incompatib it ialecti sen nd esire. imately, “mood” and rat f ntologically rom rat esire.
y Pro M el de Be i p a p er on the cont p Rena Bar aras (Sorbonn who tr s to a e a Last ear fessor of d igu Most ofistegu Bar aras’resented w s areap as yet unt emporary but French the henomenologistfew that t e b udn t b into E e), we canie a rticulat g a phenomenology of what a p esire. of b e woork amou to. In thisranslated p I will from the main ahey havts heee offersranslated in the essa nglish,L M lready an Desireet glimpse), a b virtuehenomenology of j ondesir show ho uld the yo nt H er aper, present of suchrgumen a p l p h of ya pife, ovement, ofd d (2008 nd y uxtapositi w ung eidegg had already fered henomenologica at henomenology esire.
his is a p h that we fi in H er be e his ont l tur most n the K er l e t Basic Problems of Phen T ). Weat can r hinknd He eideggs p for inologica light o a jn, otablyon in h Barriegsnotsemestas’ t an expecture anitled a e p omenology one (1919es the notionet of d idegger’ henomenology f uxtapositi wit bar ext, d lor lternativ Heideggerian ath, that includ esire. n the p er we will explore how Bar aras r hinks the unit an t of life as d thus putt “ an ab ce at theI hea apt of l e; ab ce as that towarb s w et life strives rathery d than as a lack outaccomplishmen of w life comes (i. esire, contra J s’ ding incompleteness”on of life as a metad senc r to pif sen In our an dsis ofhich He s KNS lectur e will e thehich notions of moe. ion a ona te efiniti an see ho they satiboli the tendencyeria set b reservation). Bar aras while also seeingaly h t idegger’ amou to a r e, w ion of explor l’s ( Br no’s)tivat notion ofnd in ndency, tyd as d w f thesfy medieval crition of d y e (ὄb ow hey nt adicalizat Husser and enta tentionali erived rom not esir ρεξις).
Name: J mes (U ersity C ege Du Republic of I
Email: Seferin a niv oll blin, reland)
Title of Paper: e a the M sics of Presen
'Absenc nd etaphy ce'
Abstract: l all to the nce ion hether le l s Descartes, the Hume,m Kant and Husser h aappealed nce to prese of intuit sm.– w his performative,nce to sensible,c intelligibion oras phenomenologica to ive – as grounds for refora ofs philosophy to t thisthroug ionresista metaphysicals dogmatise s T n resista to dogmati henspeculat e wts felt g ncephilosophy is the it dignity.nce toDerrid appearics ut inver sics conventelf. his and throw mphilosophy' to e sen of it if ow dignity in todisarray we h assersics that prese ichnot is resista metaphysa bimesmetaphy itss thisT would see thermak it difficult, not impossible,hile ouncingdemarcat asmetaphy a ncefrom to that whsics is notll metaphysics. hisDerrid er sometill ue acknowledge there are s difficulty oth theand at o l times writes, notably w den Husserl, if resista metaphy sti possible. T pap w arg that trace of b traditiona sense
the l to s ngs (a) e hat a ounces er he the sics of metaphysicsnce is and conventionasical ut resistance it in Derrida'nce; (b)writi e isin thatll a tracesom ofhatw as Derrid den undnce t ngheading of metaphya ofst prese clearly othmetaphy the bsicsnot obviouslynce prese the therce tosti of sw w formerlyon termedl presees thebei deployed by Derrid again metaphysics. If b metaphy e of toprese andish resistann the onit in theDerrida' H considerati an L of Hussern t involv presencing of absence and absent presence, then how would it b possible distingu betwee horiz of usserlian d evinasia race?
Name: mes e ivity Denmark Ja Jardin (Center for Subject Research, University of Copehnhagen,Email: )
Title of Paper: 'Presence and Absence in Edmund Husserl's Phenomenology of Empathy'
Abstract: l’s on lies s On e as Edmund Hussere work l empathyceimp two line of thought,n whichthe taken is togetheriven as appearselfin tension.e e the one hand, empathy is describedhis annirreducible, intuitiv is a and origina experien of another person, aringi which other g her a ther befor as m in bodily presence. T t other perso ofl empathy as “thoroughly intuitive” selfexpressive whole, Onbe the two intertwined dimensions,l s lived asbody essentiallyce personally significan is aand a personal subject essentially manifesting her in a lived body. the other hand, nHusser maintain that, eexperien hat is of mesubjectivity, s empathy s the non- origina presentification, iven and indeed that is theempathized content, as content esof a foreig onconsciousness, the can onlyive b w it onfor thein it absence. Thu only subject genuinelyl’s g sesin empathym himempathizing to the Ego,sionwhich t serv as analogs thefor interpret ce apprehensi the aof leempathized a Alter Ego. Put briefly, Husser both as a ‘panaly t’ isee to leadl obj an ‘abconclut’ i tha lempathy su intend other, at on and in unity of sing act, in peculiarly divided manner, resen ntentiona ect, and sen ntentiona bject.
Name: Kurtz a U US
Email: Katherine (Villanov niversity, )
Title of Paper: to e is n h he c of L e in Be an Time' '“How Includ What See wit Hearing and Listening”: T Problemati anguag ing d
Abstract: his er s h s ng ime the nce age hin n’s ers h T er topap work the primarilye thewit Heidegger’ Bei and T e to situateng prese of languhin his wit Dasei encount er wit being-s in-the-age world,hin intheord clarifyl naturl of e relationship the ng between n languag a ay and bei ts already at playl wit ce toearly the work.ic Here, Heidegg situate as langu wit l primordia existentiaic structur of bei of Dasei in w that gran lesontologica to e significanthe on ontage tophenomenon ng, of speech Dasein’s factica possibility s for authent shared worldly disclosure. However, oes Heideggert e strugge ngsecur relati of langu beio?” hisreflected erin hisill unanswered this question,on “I [language]uishingan innerworldly the usefulh thingageat hand or ds selfi hav the mod of bei esof Dasein, or neither of the tw T thepap w navigate sive questi theby disting ce ways in whic langunce present it es in three particular the mode of speech identified by Heidegger: everyday ofh discur speech, c apparentech areabsen so of speech in the sile cthat accompani anxiety, and smor d elusive,se hasmysteriously the te dubbed to fall prey“poetic” to i le[dichtende]. t H Boter sdiscursiveles out andthe poetic asspe constituted hasfor theauthenti isclosingworldly disclosure,nce as s bute wheream. his iscourer ill ue ndency is thisd alk, eidegg ingse poeti s that modehing ofespeech the thatc to d the of existe it tru ai T pap ew arg thate it isprecisely tendency of discour the that necessitateh the helpsomet likt poetisconi’s keep openion thepossibility forssauthentic shared ss)disclosur viangslanguag to that not the entirelyce severed from the everyday. ill e Wit e the of cRober as Bernal explicat the of nothingneto ng n (or no- thingne thatarbelo as languagees in absence of speech,erts n’scase w b mad force wpoetih r crucia to lanfor preserving ofconnection H s beier wi everyday language, insof it provok an experien which inv Dasei mistaken dominan it espect guage, foreboding eidegger’ lat ork.
Name: a P escu ( of Sussex, U
Email: Alexandr op University K)
Title of Paper: he A t F M imal Co in Lé as a Der
'T bsen riend: in mmunity vin nd rida'
Abstract: er the ew there n se the uel s’s the on n hics hisOv has lastn f years, has a beet an increa in interests ina’s Emman al Lévinas on work, and particularlye has in n relatia betwee et anda politics. T le bee influenced, er the to greaon extent, by Jacque Derrid influenti writing Lévinas. Ther hical also beet on thedebate, extending overcal considerabt on thenumber of years, ov s functie nof deconstruction,lit n andse whetherho one coulda’s speak asof it as having theany et imporn one hand, and lepoliti to toimpor the other. Commentator those ho hav beee to sp betweece the tho w see Derrid workon continuing the Lévinasian legacy, and thusthus havingeveal litt as offer tlypolitical, and he we would lik iondivor is trajectory on of deconstructice from ion Lévinasia heritage,s’s n and s asr it being inheren political. Te as abov ther split in interpretat to er to largely the based the divergenoing of interpretat e a of Lévinat’ er ow writing h as essentially about ethics,ng, and therefor ei h the having littleng to off e political, on or ascs undergh the fisomethinge of the lik t ‘spli in lat writings, suc Otherwise than Bei or Beyond Essence, wit focus comi rest mor clearly politi througn this p gurI argue that Derhird. a’s d of the concept of ‘m imal ’ as ‘ab ce hin p nce’ in P cs F can be t to theI L aper,n dev ofrid the ‘otherevelopment in O in than friendshipng. De a sugsen wit ‘m imalrese fr ’oliti as the ofp riendshipcal f m o b racedh evinasia b the ‘ielopment hete ty’ -within-the-self’and ‘d metrical therwisecur ’ the Bei rridn conce gestst of the otherin iendship d oliti F or f eing-witt s demandedes as ay sp ngnfinite w hin whichrogenei ‘m imal comissym ty’ ar Mving p thatosal Levinasiaes the imp p ment -within-the-self ab e: I arg thatemands. Der a’sriendship t ht huon the emergcal ne notaci be it f thein L munin t ises. sincey therop resolv n conceasset of the ‘otherioned ov ue ’ in alr rid a concehoug t which politilishesed p ics asdivorced the ne rom in evinasiae forcerajectory, w hin the et Levinasia p -within-the-self eady p estab olit cessary, terruptiv it hical.
Name: e Rob ersity o E UK
Email: Catherin b (Univ f ssex, )
Title of Paper: e the ts to an John C ' 'Silenc at Limi of Phenomenology: Listening Merleau- Ponty d age
Abstract: is le to e a if nce the ce ? s nce ht as t How a it possib envisagce? phenomenology oferssilence, cesile as theis distinctivelycal absene of soundage I sile better as thoug ofal an absenng presence, or as present absence Merleau-Pontyng on considh silen ce is dialecti t opposit tyof hatlangu s and gesture,on to e the temporht th beginni nce.of expression, this mute experience is awaitince, expressi throug sound. Silen a pregnans potentiali t eallow as expressi bthisbroug for to prese nce Fromhas to reading, silen henan absee noter necessarilyohn age’snegative, albut one which allow for sound to emerg present. sHowever, phenomenology s of sile osingbe questionednce, ew wses consid the ole J Cnce; semin is composition,t to entitled on4’33, consisting is of fouron minuteelf. hisand is thirty-threet secondthe of silence. hoBy comp ming sile Cag rever the r hoof aresile silence no prior to expressihearing butal thenceexpressi as the its meT a ap both fore performer, w tly,is perforage’s ncesilence, is no and forer audience,ce ut wa intentionally nlistening to sical and music silel outco e nowof performativ gesture. Significan ’s C sile nce? long an hatabsen b present object ope’s ermu and phenomenologicale the analysis. a Should w automatically nce reject e Merleau-Ponty theoryes of silence I suggesth thet by lookingcal at Merleau-Pontyons celat work, 'The Visibut as and Invisible',e phenomenology ofncesile is thuscan b reconstructed that figur onsile notn throug dialecti othoppositi ns theof absen and presence, nce asb an to in-visibl or hidden-presence. the litySile age’s an intermediary, ncethe transiti an betweeab p thencedialectic, n a pwhich b ab explai but the ppotentialityt b nof thesile two prior expression, and intentiona of C silence. Thus, sile is neither sent rese or resent sence, ivo etwee .
Name: Joshua Roe (Uni ersity o O UK
v f xford, )
Email:
Title of Paper: he A on of S P in M H '
'T ppropriati cotist hilosophy artin eidegger
Abstract: his er ill ue s on ns s ce ct the nceT pap e’sw arg thationHeidegger’ appropriatin his of Du Scotuser employ an to understanding s of transcenden distin c from prevalenceh of immanes on in Deleuz ns interpretatcotus of Scotus. I habilitation,to e nHeidegg attempted as find trace a of phenomenologyle ine scholasti thinking, cotus wit particular focu ona work by Du hingsS (although are l now believeds hav are bee authored by Thomes theof Erfurt,s discip of Scotus).on H argued the that S recognisedss the distincti between t thethat l is rea and thingto the thativen abstract.e stractThis provid thebasi for ans theindicati stract of priority to of givenne in phenomenology. lied theWhereby, ion rea equivalentl stract g to and th ab theis derivedalfrom e ongiven. Thu s ab is secondary the real. Heideggers thene aapp n divis on between rea and ab a discussions of e a medievn debatme ut three typect of language: univocal, denoting thingeswhich hav hingcommo isdefiniti ct and alsoname; equivocal, hingdenoting thing hinwhich hav er commo na b distin meaning; is and analogy, which describt on how somet the samethat way thatdistin t e acanstract ishave dep somett on thecommon r Thwit eit. a Heidegg f argued that, isin noanalogy, less dissimilarityc the notl necessarily cotusdependen has osimilarity n to in ce the h b Giles enden ho eal. erefor the nalogy, or Heidegger, basi as than rea as given. S e uesals riseng prominen in work of Deleuze, w has proposed hinpriority self. of the Scotist idea hisof univocity emphasising on immanence. Deleuz args the that bei is primarily thedefined lens by univocity,n which then er diversityl uewit it Philip Tonner, in recent as book le tounivocity in Heidegger,ut reads Habilitation throughe d nct fr univoof Deleuziaal t univocity. Howev I wil arg that Heidegger did not regard analogy reducib univocity, b appreciate how analogy could b isti om c erms.
Name: M í Rojas (Uni ersity o Sussex, U
Email: David art nez v f K)
Title of Paper: 'Phenomenology and Critical Theory: Inequality and Equality in Ethics'
Abstract: n a’s t there is a s a l nge s ty the n is I Levinas’s e and Derrid though e er phoint the ofther view that representeys reatschalle h as for theorie of moralie in Kantia ntradition. as’ This point grounded in th phenomenology of th encount wit o and it er lies infinity use al ons totalities conv e theconcep sucss asymmetryto the sameand infinit e responsibility. his I Levinon this encount imp s the beca ontologic e relati to the that she form es the reducer the otherne ein s eof th ther subject. T relati e properlyto understood mean that other cannotivity b reducedes ualitysame, as escap le pow ofhis ssubject , sh impact me lik anyuseo thisobject or force. Du this, in phenomenology,es uality from intersubject as emerg tsineq hisa princip s clear of ethics. Tas’si differentse in deontology, becae is in case, from intersubjectivityns are emergual (just eq those andn symmetry ms are core concep all of ethics. T i ns in Haberm Discour as principle,ts wherl it implied that perso to free and equality e actio me nor to ms validh to which possibly affected perso could agree participann o this in rationa discourses). the According e Derrida, from eq w cannot co ter wit the other in her difference, therefore, e on the the infinity only in oppositio es t a sionprinciple can other b is recognized. the In phenomenology, is ethics shouldt b groundedas’s? n his ideat of of the other,s and it impli ts dimene a of asymmetry. However, the it reallyss case that asymmetrye absen in Haberm his I t concep of memorythe Habermas thestate that participan e hav responsibility ctedregarding h otherne n sof past andxt futurt togenerations. evelop othFurthe rmore,oaches in concep of solidarity,ill contrast vulnerability iscussingof hether other should b recognized and prote wit empathy. I thi contees theI wan siond of asyb appr (I (I&II); finally I w them, d w Habermas, through memory and solidarity, properly includ dimen mmetry II).
Name: n White (UC River US
Email: Justi side, )
[email protected] Title of Paper: h's es:
'Explaining Van Gog Sho A Heideggerian Response to Schapiro'
Abstract: s ion ir use er as ong out e es they Meyer n iginSchapiro thefamously criticized Heidegger’er interpretats e of Van Gogh’sisclosesA Pathe of Shoes, largelyhe becat Heidegg ut thew eswr ab whos e sho ere were. Ia Or of Work of Art, Heidegg suggest hoes isclosethat th a painting d ’s world the of t smpeasan woman, if b s sho depicted’s in th a painting w es?likely e city man’se shoes. thisYet howsmcan Van Gogh’s hileS d s peasant misses woman world,s critici art goes,isclosesit depict a neither ahpeasant nor woman’s sho Somtrice hav foundle’s iscussion critici effective, w otherlity think it Heidegger’ pointoesof ahow ong day world. Althoug not framing ithtin this n way, Beá s Han-Pi dion in “Describing Rea he or s Disclosing Worldhood”iong l w towardes a suggestingn how one mig explai Heidegger’es (mis)interpretats ut the of Vaner Gogh’sill Shoes. to ill S theclaim asthat any interpretatn ion to of an artworkc involv fusioion o of sorts. The artwork discloses structur the of itl world, b the interpret illw need e f thein gaps, it were. I additn the aesthetil sensitivity, the attent t thedetail, and such, ourultingknowledge theof origina sworld of theartwork wes determin thedegree of proximity his betwee originaes worldhe of artwork to andue hybrid world res from intepreter’ filling in structur disclosed by to work of art. T al frameworksm. provid t hoesresources iscloses a resc Heidegger’sut erseemingly outfailed interpretation the ofesVan Gogh, thereby respondingic ut Schapiro’s influenti critici eVan Gogh’s hatS d world, b oesHeidegg fleshese thes world of shol in an inevitably idiosyncrat b sin thisiscussioncase historically the inaccurats way. e T shortcoming,e however, e sd not evenmak if Heidegger’er as phenomenologicaer o V Gogaccount lea ofes artsomethingirrelevant. to beHeidegger’ d d of way artwork can b world disclosiv need not los it potency, Heidegg interpret f an h v esired. ) y a
w
e
n
o ( Main buildings
t n e c s Accelerator Building 49 Hastings 34 e r C
d Aisin Seiki 41 Health Centre 6 l
e i f
h t Arts A 22 Institute of Development Studies (IDS) 19 r
o N Arts B 18 John Clifford West 35
Arts C 17 John Maynard Smith 47 Arundel 28 Jubilee Building 15 No rt hf ie Asa Briggs (A1 and A2) Lecture Theatres Jubilee Lecture Theatre ne l 21 15a La d eld L rthfi a No n e Ashdown House 42 Library 20 Attenborough Centre 56 Mantell 32 Boiler House 31 Meeting House 53 Bramber House 13 Pevensey l 52 BSMS Research 45 Pevensey II 50 BSMS Teaching 46 Pevensey III 26 Chichester I 24 Richmond 29 Chichester II 25 Shawcross 23 Chichester III 27 Silverstone 16 Chichester Lecture Theatre 51 Sport Centre 57 Childcare centre (under construction) 58 Sussex Health Outcomes Research and Clinical Imaging Sciences Centre (CISC) 39 Education in Cancer (SHORE-C) 37 Essex House 12 Sussex House 54 Falmer House 55 Sussex Innovation Centre 44 Falmer Sports Complex 36 Sussex Centre for Language Studies 22 Freeman Centre 43 Thermo-Fluid Mechanics
D A O Friston 33 Research Centre (TFMRC) 40 R E G A L L Fulton 30 Trafford Centre 38 I V K R P A Genome Centre 48 Visitors’ car park VP
D Student residences
OA
R
Brighthelm 4 Northfield 1
ORY
T East Slope 5 Norwich House 11
C
FE Kent House 8 Park Village 3
E
R Kulukundis House 9 Stanmer Court 59 L A N C A S T E R H O U S E R O A D Lancaster House 7 Swanborough 14 Lewes Court 2 York House 24-hour reception 10 School offices Business, Management and Economics K History, Art History and Philosophy F Brighton and Sussex Medical School (BSMS) H Law, Politics and Sociology B N O R W I C H H O U S EE R O A D Education and Social Work A Mathematical and Physical Sciences L Engineering and Informatics G Life Sciences J
Bramber English E Media, Film and Music D House Global Studies C Psychology I
Bus stop Information point 24-hour security point/reception
a Car park Railway station Wheelchair access for Library JUBILEE
D
OA
BUILDING R
ORY T Fulton C Mantell
FE
E
R
Falmer Sports Complex
D A R T S R O A D A O R B O I L E R H O U S E H I L L N O I L I V A P
IDS Shawcross
D
A
O
R Hastings
ARY
R E
B
I A
L S T
E R N
R I
Library N G
G R O Library Square A D
CISC
Meeting House
Attenborough R O A D S C I E N C Centre E P A R K R O A D
K Falmer House N
I D G
UTH
A H
O
O T
R S
E Sussex House H-S G
T A
TR T
N E
R
N O R
CE
O
A E R Brighton D entrance/exit N Sussex 46:MEDICAL Innovation
(A270) ARD Centre G U N I V E R S I T Y W A Y SCHOOL
B I O L O G Y R O A D E T R E S T L L M I
Spor ts Centre
S O U T H E R N R I N G R O A D
A 2 7 L E W E S
B R I G H T O N / W O R T H I N G A 2 7
The Keep (under construction, opening 2013)
American Express Community Stadium