Levinas vs. Maldiney. On the Face of Sensible Nature

If environmental ethics would be a part of politics, as Levinas suggests, it would run the danger of privileging human interests and downplaying the power of nature’s own ethical call. This is why the present article against Levinas argues that nature needs and has a face in the strong ethical sense...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Petr Prášek
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Institute Nova Revija for the Humanities 2023-12-01
Series:Phainomena
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.phainomena.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/8_E-PHI-126-127_Pra%CF%84ek.pd
_version_ 1797372568900993024
author Petr Prášek
author_facet Petr Prášek
author_sort Petr Prášek
collection DOAJ
description If environmental ethics would be a part of politics, as Levinas suggests, it would run the danger of privileging human interests and downplaying the power of nature’s own ethical call. This is why the present article against Levinas argues that nature needs and has a face in the strong ethical sense. It begins by extracting the definitional criteria of the face from Levinas, and then—through an excursion into the work of Maldiney, whose relevance for eco-phenomenology it wants to highlight—follows some of the attempts to extend the concept of face beyond human ethics. Thus, the article concludes that sensible nature, giving itself as Maldiney’s event, does not have a human face, but the encounter with its transcendence in its various facialities has a similar ethical force, from which an eco-phenomenological ethics of nature could grow.
first_indexed 2024-03-08T18:36:34Z
format Article
id doaj.art-26bb1cd0241b4f1695babe9f63bca1aa
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1318-3362
2232-6650
language deu
last_indexed 2024-03-08T18:36:34Z
publishDate 2023-12-01
publisher Institute Nova Revija for the Humanities
record_format Article
series Phainomena
spelling doaj.art-26bb1cd0241b4f1695babe9f63bca1aa2023-12-29T10:50:19ZdeuInstitute Nova Revija for the HumanitiesPhainomena1318-33622232-66502023-12-0132126-12715718410.32022/PHI32.2023.126-127.8Levinas vs. Maldiney. On the Face of Sensible NaturePetr Prášek0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7094-562XCzech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Philosophy, Prague, Czech RepublicIf environmental ethics would be a part of politics, as Levinas suggests, it would run the danger of privileging human interests and downplaying the power of nature’s own ethical call. This is why the present article against Levinas argues that nature needs and has a face in the strong ethical sense. It begins by extracting the definitional criteria of the face from Levinas, and then—through an excursion into the work of Maldiney, whose relevance for eco-phenomenology it wants to highlight—follows some of the attempts to extend the concept of face beyond human ethics. Thus, the article concludes that sensible nature, giving itself as Maldiney’s event, does not have a human face, but the encounter with its transcendence in its various facialities has a similar ethical force, from which an eco-phenomenological ethics of nature could grow.https://www.phainomena.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/8_E-PHI-126-127_Pra%CF%84ek.pdeco-phenomenologyenvironmental ethicsnaturefacelevinasmaldiney
spellingShingle Petr Prášek
Levinas vs. Maldiney. On the Face of Sensible Nature
Phainomena
eco-phenomenology
environmental ethics
nature
face
levinas
maldiney
title Levinas vs. Maldiney. On the Face of Sensible Nature
title_full Levinas vs. Maldiney. On the Face of Sensible Nature
title_fullStr Levinas vs. Maldiney. On the Face of Sensible Nature
title_full_unstemmed Levinas vs. Maldiney. On the Face of Sensible Nature
title_short Levinas vs. Maldiney. On the Face of Sensible Nature
title_sort levinas vs maldiney on the face of sensible nature
topic eco-phenomenology
environmental ethics
nature
face
levinas
maldiney
url https://www.phainomena.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/8_E-PHI-126-127_Pra%CF%84ek.pd
work_keys_str_mv AT petrprasek levinasvsmaldineyonthefaceofsensiblenature