Sadler Cole W 201911 Phd Thesis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Aesthetic Versus Aesthetics: Emmanuel Levinas’ Cri- tique of Mediation by Cole Wesley Sadler A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department for the Study of Religion University of Toronto © Copyright by Cole Sadler 2019 Sadler "ii Abstract The Aesthetic Versus Aesthetics: Emmanuel Levinas’ Critique of Mediation Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) 2019 Cole Wesley Sadler Department for the Study of Religion University of TorontoThe student's thesis title, degree and year of convocation, full name, name of graduate department, and name of university must appear on the top of the abstract's first page. Emmanuel Levinas’ corpus occupies itself with the critique of representations mediating the experience of an individual with the world and the Other person. For Levinas, any attempt of an individual to mediate their experience of the Other is inherently inauthentic, and he argues that the mediating term between the self and Other has the quality of the plastic image. This plastic image d’art is the object with which aesthetics concerns itself. Therefore, Levinas’ cri- tique of mediation is a critique of aesthetics. The Phenomenological tradition in philosophy has the solution to the problem of aesthetics. The solution lies in Phenomenology’s basis in the philosophy of Immanuel Kant. Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason [First Critique] outlines the proper use of the term ‘aesthetic’ as based in the Greek aisthesis, meaning ‘sensation.’ Thus, Kant opens his First Critique with ‘The Transcen- dental Aesthetic’ of space and time as the conditions for all sensation. Phenomenology’s thesis that all consciousness is consciousness of something is indebted to this fundamental analytic of sensation. I term the fundamental analytic of sensation as ‘the aesthetic,’ as opposed to the more popular notion of ‘aesthetics’ as a concern with art and the beautiful. Ultimately, representation is a necessary element to experience, requiring that an individual re- present their experience to themself. I call The need for an individual to represent the Other to themselves ‘epistemological original sin.’ For Levinas’ Jewish context, representing the divine Other is akin to idolatry. Only the ethical revelation of the Other to the self is the solution to this fundamental problem of Phenomenology. Sadler iii" Acknowledgements With all that I have overcome in my life, it is impossible for me to have made any ac- complishments without acknowledging my indebtedness to Others. I have been sustained and assisted by countless excellent individuals. Words fail to describe the gratitude I hold toward my Doktorvater, Professor David Novak, who has also employed me as his research assistant since January of 2012, in addition to advising my PhD. In like manner, I am grateful to Profes- sor Novak for his assistance with the Talmudic texts used in this thesis. I am grateful to Profes- sors James DiCenso and Robert Gibbs for their continued guidance in my scholarship: these individuals have helped to make me the scholar I am today. My studies would have been im- possible without the excellence of the Department for the Study of Religion administrators, Fereshteh Hashemi, Irene Kao, and Marilyn Colaço. Finally, I am grateful to my family for sup- porting my education all these years. Cole Sadler July 4th, 2019 Sadler iv" Abstract ii Acknowledgements iii Introduction 1 §1. Levinas and the Problem of Mediation 1 §2. Kant and the Problem of the Aesthetic versus Aesthetics 2 §3. Husserl’s Phenomenology and the Aesthetic 3 §4. Chapter Summaries 3 §5. Jewish Existentialism 5 §6. The Aesthetic and the Study of Religion 7 §7. Scholarly Engagement With Levinas’ Critique of Mediation 8 Chapter One: The Problem of Mediation in Kant’s Critical Corpus 10 §1. Judgment in the Critique of Pure Reason 10 §2. Schematism as Mediating Concept 11 §3. The Category of Community as Epistemological, not Social 13 §4. Representation and Experience 17 §5. Kant’s Critique of Traditional Metaphysical Categories 19 §6. Phenomenality Versus Causality 22 §7. Kant’s Transcendental Dialectic 25 §8. Kant’s Introduction of Practical Reason (Ethics) In the First Critique 28 §9. The Disciplines of Pure Reason, and their Antinomies 30 §10. Individual as Thing (Soul As Substance) 34 §11. Rational Cosmology: Totality of a Closed System 39 §12. Kant’s Antinomies of Pure Reason 42 §13. Postulates of Pure Reason 44 §14. Kant’s Transcendental Ideality (Prototypon Transcendentale) 48 §15. Arguments for God's Existence: Existence is not a Predicate 50 Chapter Two: Kant’s Doctrine of Method and the Critique of Judgment 55 §1. The Doctrine of Method 55 §2. Kant and the Problematic of Things 57 Sadler "v §3. Kant Anticipates Critique of Judgment 60 §4. Kant’s Definition of Metaphysics 61 §5. Kant’s Critique of Judgment and Mediation 62 §6. The Critique of Technical Reason 66 §7. Kant’s Comparative on the Different Modes of the Aesthetic 70 §8. Kant’s Definition of the Beautiful 74 Chapter Three: Heidegger and the Problematic of the Thing in Western Philosophy 79 §1. Heidegger’s Hermeneutics of Kant’s Epistemology 79 §2. Problematic of ‘Mind’ Versus Consciousness 81 §3. Appearance and Nothingness 84 §4. Aesthetic Self-Presentation 86 §5. Traditional Categories of Form and Matter 89 §6. Heidegger’s Primacy of Time over Space 91 §7. Johan Huizinga’s Fundamental Analytic of Play 94 §8. Heidegger’s Spatiality of Enframing 95 §9. Sundosis and the Problem of Wholism 99 §10. Categorical Substance and Temporality 102 §11. The Problematic of Thing-ification 105 §12. The Ingenuity of Kant’s Schematism 106 Chapter Four: Levinas and the Problem of Mediation 109 §1. Levinas’ Preliminary Analysis of On Ideas 109 §2. Levinas’ Dissertation on Husserl 113 §3. Judgment as Representation 115 §4. Levinas, Sensation, and Non-appearance 117 §5. Levinas’ Early Analysis of Mediation 120 §6. Levinas’ Interim Texts 122 §7. Ipseity, Il y a, The ‘There Is’ 125 §8. The Light of Consciousness and the Darkness of the Il y a 128 §9. Ego and God 130 Sadler vi" §10. Aesthetic Mediation in De l’existence à l’existant 134 §11. The Dark Density of Presence 137 §12. Metaphysical Hypostasis 140 §13. The Nietzschian Upsurge Into History 143 §14. Critique of Intersubjectivity in De l’existence á l’existant 145 §15. “The Ruin of Representation” 151 §16. “The Permanent and the Human in Husserl” 159 Chapter Five: The Maturation of Levinas’ Critique of Mediation in Totality and Infinity 162 §1. Levinas’ Critique of Heidegger’s Fundamental Ontology 162 §2. Abraham as Prototypical Moral Individual 167 §3. Equality Versus Alterity 172 §4. Levinas’ Critique of Heraclitus 174 §5. Radical Alterity 177 §6. Necessary Mediation 179 §7. Prereflective, Autochthonious Enjoyment 183 §8. The Other as Non-Representation 185 §9. Bifurcation of Self from Self 188 §10. Approaching the Other, However Asymptotic 191 §11. Community as Distinct from the Other 196 §12. Definition of the Self as Same 199 §13. The Dwelling 202 Chapter Six: Apophatic Versus Apophansis 205 §1. Husserlian Apophansis 205 §2. Levinas’ Critique of Negativity in Totality and Infinity 209 §3. Maimonides Negative Theology of Unity Simpliciter 212 §4. The Will as Egoism 214 §5. Levinas and Positivity 216 §6. The Ego’s Autonomy in the Face of the Other 222 §7. The Encounter in the Dwelling 226 Sadler "vii §8. Metaphysics as Positivity 230 §9. The Interim Between Totality and Infinity and Otherwise than Being 233 §11. Apo-Phansis 238 §12. Negative Theology in Otherwise Than Being 244 §13. Conclusion: The Absence of God as Opposed to a Mediating God 249 Afterword 252 Bibliography 253 Sadler 1" Introduction §1. Levinas and the Problem of Mediation In the Jewish tradition, idolatry is the worship of a god represented in the plastic (‘graven’) image. Judaism affirms only one God that is not subject to representation. For the Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Levinas, the most divine reality available to an individual’s expe- rience is the Other person. Therefore, for Levinas, idolatry is anything which attempts to medi- ate the self/Other relation. Levinas argues that the self’s attempt to mediate the Other for their- self has a quality of representation analogous to the plastic image. The plastic image has the quality of sensation (represented to the self) and therefore the ethical concern of one’s relation to the Other is epistemological, as well as metaphysically ethical. It should be emphasized that Levinas’ critique of the plastic image of aesthetics is not a literal critique of art and aesthetics as such, but rather serves as a metaphor for the metaphysical relation between an individual self and the Other person. In the manner that Emmanuel Levinas argues war is a basis for all philosophy, so too is Hegel’s Master/Slave dialectic the model for all interpersonal relations.1 Hegel’s Master/Slave dialectic is a metaphor for the consciousness of an individual Self in relation to the Other per- son.2 Despite accusations of pessimism, this manner of relation is the human condition. In or- der for a Self (who is the Same to their-Self) to deal with the anxiety of an Other whom they cannot control, the individual person attempts multiple strategies to neutralize the agency of the Other. One strategy consists in the Self absorbing the Other into their Same-ness through ‘capturing’ (i.e. enslaving) that other. This strategy posits everything is experienced through the mind of the Self, and the Other is merely Same ancillary to the Self’s consciousness. Because this strategy attempts to in-corporate (lit. ‘bring-bodies-together’) the Other into the Same, the sphere of the Self’s Same-ness is called ‘totality.’ Another strategy of the Self’s mastery over the Other is to deny Other-ness in favour of Self-division into a Same individual becoming their own Self-and-Other relationship.