Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[45]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[54]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[45]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2016-12-17 14:49:01.138
	1	+2016-12-17 14:49:01.0

Caselist.CitesClass[54]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,8 @@
	1	+HIJACK. And, since ethics concerns the relationships between multiple people, the only way to be an ethical subject is to be for the other. Ethical subjectivity is an ongoing process, so I have a permanent responsibility for the other.
	2	+
	3	+Nealon :
	4	+
	5	+For Levinas, on the other hand, if one is to be an ethical subject, one must escape the dark, anonymous rumbling of Being; in order for there to be a subjectivity responsive to the other, there must be a hypostasis that lifts the subject out of its wallowing in the Solipsistic raw Materiality of the il y a. Out of the “there is” of anonymous being, there must rise a “Here I Am.” me voici that nonetheless retains the trace of the hesitation and debt ~-~- what Levinas will call the "passivity" ~-~- characteristic of the il y a's impossibility. As he writes, hypostasis is subject-production, the introduction of space or place into the anonymous murmur of being: "to be conscious is to be torn away from the “there is" (EandE, p. 60/98). Subjectivity is torn away from impersonal being the anonymity of the there is by a responding to the other that is not reducible to any simple rule-governed or universalizing code; the ethical subject is, in other words, a responding, site-specific performative that is irreducible to an ontological or transhistorical substantive. As Levinas writes, “the body is the very advent of consciousness. It is nowise a thing ~-~- not only because a soul inhabits it, but because its being belongs to the order of events and not to that of substantives. It is not posited; it is a position. It is not situated in space given beforehand; it is the irruption in anonymous being of localization itself. . . . The body as subjectivity does not express an event; it is itself this Event. (EandE, pp. 71,72/122,124)” This is perhaps the most concise statement of Levinas's understanding of a subjectivity that rises out of the il y a through hypostasis: the subject comes about through a performative response to the call of the other, through the bodily taking up of a "position," "the irruption in anonymous being of localization itself." However, this hypostasis is not the intentional act of a subject; it is, rather, subjection in and through the face-to-face encounter with the other person. As Levinas writes, "the localization of consciousness is not subjective; it is the subjectivization of the subject" (EandE, p. 69/118). Thus, "here I am" rises out of the there is as an accusative, where I am the object rather than the subject of the statement, where I am responding to a call from the face of the other. As Jan de Greef writes, "for Levinas the movement of subjectivity does not go from me to the other but from the other to me . . . . “Here I Am” (me voici) ~-~- the unconditional of the hostage ~-~- can only be said in response to an 'appeal' or a 'preliminary citation.' Convocation precedes invocation."16 It is to-the-other that one responds in the hypostasis that lifts the subject out of the il y a the face of the other, and its call for response-as-subjection, is the only thing that can break the subject's imprisonment in the anonymous il y a and open the space of continuing response to alterity. As Levinas sums up the project of his Existence and Existents, "it sets out to approach the idea of Being in general in its impersonality so as to then be able to analyze the notion of the present and of position, in which a being, a subject, an existent, arises in impersonal Being, through a hypostasis" (p. 19/18). As the evasion of the "impersonal being" that is the il y a hypostasis (as the concrete performative response to the face or voice of the other person) is the birth of the ethical Levinasian subject. Such a so subjection to the other which makes or produces a subject at the same time that it unmakes any chance for the subject to remain an alienated or free monad. As Levinas writes, "The subject is inseparable from this appeal or this election, which cannot be declined" (OTB, p. 53/68), so the subject cannot be thematized in terms of alienation from some prior state of wholeness; in Levinasian subjectivity, there is an originary interpellating appeal of expropriation, not an originary loss of the ability to appropriate.
	6	+
	7	+
	8	+same offence

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2016-12-17 14:50:55.737

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Sasso

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Lake Highland SS

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+45

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+5

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+North Crowley Reed Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+4- Levinas Hijack vol 2

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Strake