Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

In place of the Other

  • Published:
Continental Philosophy Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper outlines the basic traits of a responsive phenomenology by focusing on the issue of originary substitution. On the one hand, a phenomenology of alienness or otherness and an ethics of the other in the sense of Levinas will prove to be closely bound up with this sort of substitution. On the other side, this substitution can be concretised by transitional figures such as the advocate, the therapist, the translator, the witness, or the field researcher; they all intervene from the position of a Third without closing the fissure which opens between ourselves and the Other, between the own and the alien. Precisely by focussing on the issue of substitution, we have the opportunity to outline the basis traits of a responsive phenomenology and to discuss some of its institutional consequences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Concerning my conception of a responsive phenomenology see my books Antwortregister (1994, Engl. trans. by Northwestern Press, forthcoming), Bruchlinien der Erfahrung (2002), Schattenrisse der Moral (2006b) and the compact presentation of its basic presuppositions in Grundmotive einer Phänomenologie des Fremden (2006a, Engl. trans. Phenomenology of the Alien—Basic Concepts: Northwestern Press, forthcoming).

  2. See Being and Time, § 26.

  3. The German expressions Vormund and Unmündiger are closer to the possibility of Fürsprache (= speaking in name of).

  4. Concerning the relations between citizens, Hobbes assumes that anyone who represents another does so either by or without the order of the represented (De homine, 15, 2). As to the relation between guardianship and violence see Hirsch (2004, pp. 223–230).

  5. The fact that Rousseau explains the origin of the state, just like the origin of the language, without referring to any mediation, shows that the different modes of representation are closely connected. See Derrida’s comment on Rousseau in Grammatology.

  6. cf. Leviathan, I, 16 and De homine, 15, 1.

  7. The later Frankfort School around Jürgen Habermas speaks of a “herrschaftsfreier Dialog,” based on mere arguments; accordingly I would speak of a “vertretungsloser Dialog,” based on mere autonomy; both forms of dialogue can only be defended to a certain extent.

  8. See Waldenfels (2005a, ch. 11, 2005b, ch. 7).

  9. See Waldenfels (2002, p. 34).

  10. The German language contains numerous expressions of addressing, marked by the prefix an-, see Anruf, Ansprechen, Anspruch, Anblick, Anreiz, Anrühren, Antasten, Angreifen, Antun, Andenken, Angehen and so on. A part of them are used by Husserl, Heidegger and their followers in the context of a phenomenology of affection, affectivity, interpellation, pathos, or Befindlichkeit.

  11. See Waldenfels (2009).

  12. See Laplanche (1997), Waldenfels (2005a, ch. 13).

  13. English traslation by Leonard Lawlor (Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press, forthcoming).

  14. English translation.

  15. See Levinas, Autrement qu’être (1974), ch. IV. As to the ethical meaning of the term “substitution,” we must be careful not to take the term “für den Anderen” or “pour l’autre” simply as the negation of “against” and in the sense of “in favour of.” Whereas the Latin word pro, just like the German word für, suggests such an interpretation, the Greek word ἀντί, which in many compounds signifies “against,” points rather in the opposite direction. That speaks well for separating the substitutive und the altruistic meaning of für or pour.

  16. 1971.

  17. 1976.

  18. On the role of justice see Waldenfels (2006b, ch. V); further, in reference to Levinas, Waldenfels (2005a, ch. 12, 2005b, ch. 7).

  19. See Waldenfels, Vielstimmigkeit der Rede (1999), ch. 7: on “hybrid speech,” and Waldenfels, Schattenrisse der Moral (2006b), ch. IX: on “parasitic passions.”

  20. Heidegger (1979, p. 447 f).

  21. See Hirsch (1995).

  22. Even Heidegger’s daseinsmäßige Bezeugung, which does not refer to acts of witness, but adheres to a sort of Selbstseinkönnen (cf. Being and Time, § 54), covers the phenomenon of bearing witness only in part.

  23. Provided we take into account the course of natural history, things become more complicated, even for scientists. With respect to fossils, we speak of findings; they are less remote from witness than experiments are, considering that they are not lived like lived experiences, but no less produced by experiments.

  24. For good reasons, the records of lie detectors, which in the meantime are improved by more sophisticated procedures like neuronal introspection, are not admitted in court. That resembles statements, extorted by torture. Close to Aristotle, who decided to call actions, performed under constraint, “mixed actions” (cf. Nic. Eth. III, 1), we can approximate the corresponding case of witness by speaking of “mixed testimonies”.

  25. The Iraq war has contributed to blur the roles by permitting to take along reporters as witnesses, in war actions like the thrust of tanks. We should also take a special interest in so-called live transmissions which represent a mixed form of report, creating the possibility of a mediated co-presence.

  26. An especially perverse arrangement of giving evidence, reported from Pakistan, prescribes that women have to prove their rape, although only male witnesses are admitted.

  27. cf. Därmann (2005).

  28. I refer to the chapter “Paradoxien ethnographischer Fremddarstellung” in Waldenfels, Vielstimmigkeit der Rede (1999).

References

  • Därmann, Iris. 2005. Fremde Monde der Vernunft. Die ethnologische Provokation der Vernunft. München: W. Fink.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, Jacques. 1967a. De la Grammatologie, Paris: Minuit. Engl. of Grammatology (trans: Spivak, G.C.), 1998. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins.

  • Derrida, Jacques. 1967b. La voix et le phénomène, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, Engl. Voice and Phenomenon (trans: Lawlor, L.), 2011. Northwestern Press, forthcoming.

  • Freud, Sigmund. 1976. Hemmung, Symptom und Angst (GW, vol. XIV). Frankfurt/M: Fischer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, Martin. 1979. Heraklit (GA, vol. 55). Frankfurt/M: Klostermann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, Martin. 1953. Sein und Zeit. 7. ed., Tübingen: Niemeyer. Engl. Being and Time (trans: Macquarrie, J. and Robinson, E.), 1962. New York: Harper and Row.

  • Hirsch, Alfred. 1995. Der Dialog der Sprachen. Studien zum Sprach- und Übersetzungsdenken Walter Benjamins und Jacques Derridas. München: W. Fink.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, Alfred. 2004. Recht auf Gewalt?. München: W. Fink.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laplanche, Jean. 1997. Le primat de l’’autre. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinas, Emmanuel. 1974. Autrement qu’être ou au-delà de l’essence, The Hague: M. Nijhoff. Engl. Otherwise than Being, or Beyond Essence (trans: Lingis, A.), 1981. The Hague: M. Nijhoff.

  • Waldenfels, Bernhard. 1994. Antwortregister. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp. Engl. (trans.) Northwestern Press, forthcoming.

  • Waldenfels, Bernhard. 1999. Vielstimmigkeit der Rede. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldenfels, Bernhard. 2002. Bruchlinien der Erfahrung. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldenfels, Bernhard. 2005a. Idiome des Denkens. Deutsch-Französische Gedankengänge II. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldenfels, Bernhard. 2005b. Levinas on the Saying and the Said. In Addressing Levinas, ed. E.S. Nelson, A. Kapust and K. Still. Evanston: Northwestern Press.

  • Waldenfels, Bernhard. 2006a. Grundmotive einer Phänomenologie des Fremden. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp. Engl. (trans.) Northwestern Press, forthcoming.

  • Waldenfels, Bernhard. 2006b. Schattenrisse der Moral. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waldenfels, Bernhard. 2009. Spielräume des Mögliche und Überschüsse des Unmöglichen. In Unmöglichkeiten, ed. I.U. Dalferth, Ph. Stoellger and A. Hunziker. Tübingen: Siebeck.

  • Winnicott, Donald W. 1971. Playing and reality. London: Tavistock Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Philosophie, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, 44780, Bochum, Germany

    Bernhard Waldenfels

Authors
  1. Bernhard Waldenfels
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bernhard Waldenfels.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Waldenfels, B. In place of the Other. Cont Philos Rev 44, 151–164 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11007-011-9180-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11007-011-9180-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation