Modernist heretics instead of "pursuing..God..[pursue their] self-center[ed]" self like Francis & "Levinas [who]..encounter with other..misplaced concreteness. Experiencing human faces doesn´t give people who aren´t..[Francis or] Levinas a ton of normative content": "Its..[the self enclosed loveless experience of Francis or Levinas as] one person [not real other person]"
- St. Thomas argues that excessive curiosity can be a form of pride, as it can lead to a desire for knowledge that is not ultimately directed towards a higher purpose.
- He suggests that curiosity can distract individuals from pursuing their ultimate goal, which is happiness in God. When knowledge is pursued for its own sake, without a connection to a greater good, it can become a form of self-centeredness and a hindrance to spiritual growth.
- Aquinas also highlights the potential for individuals to misuse knowledge, even truth, for evil purposes. This can happen when knowledge is used to undermine faith, to create division, or to satisfy personal desires rather than serving a higher good.
- While acknowledging the potential for sin in certain forms of curiosity, Aquinas also recognizes the value of studying philosophy and seeking knowledge. He believes that God has revealed truth to philosophers, and that the study of philosophy can be a means of attaining truth.
- The key is not to dismiss all curiosity, but to ensure that it is directed towards the right goals and serves a higher purpose. When curiosity is used to understand God, to grow in wisdom, or to serve others, it can be a positive force.
AI Overview
- Levinas argues that encountering the face of another person transcends our own subjectivity and imposes an ethical obligation to respond to their needs, essentially breaking through our self-centered perspective.
- The passage argues that Levinas' idea of ethical revelation through the face is subjective and mystical, lacking a clear objective basis for determining what constitutes ethical behavior.
- Aristotelian ethics, in contrast, is grounded in the inherent nature of human beings and the pursuit of natural ends, providing a more objective framework for moral decision-making.
- Some defenders of Levinas might argue that his focus on the other person's vulnerability and need for help is a crucial aspect of recognizing their humanity and establishing an ethical connection.
- Levinas' philosophy emphasizes the transformative power of face-to-face encounters, which can contribute to a deeper understanding of oneself and one's relationship with others.
Emmanuel Levinas
A student of Heidegger, Levinas claims reality, or ethical reality, is constituted primarily through our encounter with the other people. And specifically the faces of other people, who Levinas likes to call The Other. This encounter with other peoples faces breaks through our subjective world and commands us ethically. Levinas says “The way in which the other presents himself, exceeding the idea of the other in me, we here name face... The face of the other at each moment destroys and overflows the plastic image it leaves me, the idea existing to my own measure” (Totality and Infinity (1991), 50-51) Its basically a sort of human face mysticism, as Levinas argues that ethical reality is revealed through the face-to-face encounter with other people. But for him as well the first-person experience, particularly in the presence of another person, is fundamentally transformative in ethical formation. This is perhaps the prime example of misplaced concreteness. Experiencing human faces doesn´t give people who aren´t Emmanuel Levinas a ton of normative content. Its the reification of the bizarre ethical experience of one person. In contast, the entire tradition of aristotelian natural law ethics bases normativity on the entirity of the objective expression of the human lifeform and its tendency and the tendeny of various actions of toward specific ends by nature. [https://sanctistulti.substack.com/p/phenomenology-is-sinful?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=1653532&post_id=148585850&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=b9i7w&triedRedirect=true]
- Levinas's concept of responsibility as a pre-conscious, sensible responding to the Other's exteriority is a key theme in Bergoglio's moral theology. This aligns with Bergoglio's emphasis on solidarity and the need to take responsibility for the sufferings of others.
- Levinas's work critiques rationalism and consciousness as the basis for ethics, instead focusing on the encounter with the Other as the foundation of ethics. This resonates with Bergoglio's rejection of utilitarian approaches to ethics and his emphasis on charity and divine love.
- Bergoglio's social teaching often draws on the importance of dignity and the rights of the marginalized, which aligns with Levinas's critique of power structures that marginalize the vulnerable.
Comments