AMA Computer CollegeCebu

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL,

WISDOM OF LOVE: LEVINAS ETHICS OF THE FACE

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

It has been said somewhere that Socrates called ethics from

heaven and since then became one of the major pillars of the
philosophical pursuit.1 Yet Western Philosophy has not given it the
attention and importance befitting it.2 There are those who contended
that ethics is a rationalist self-legislation, while others see it as a
journey towards ones, or the communitys, happiness, still others
contend that it is a cultivation of virtues and others as the will of God.3
For almost all of the history of Western Philosophy, ethics has been
classified as a tertiary philosophy or what Aristotle categorized as the
1
I have paraphrased it a bit. The exact quotation is from Cicero, Socrates first
called philosophy from heaven, set her into mens homes and compelled her to
investigate life and customs, good and evil

2
Traditionally, the study of Philosophy begins with metaphysics, epistemology
and lastly, ethics. The issue of Being has been given more importance than ethics.
For metaphysicians (and ethical philosophers as well) of the past, ethics happens
only after Being.

3
cf. Emmanuel Levinas. Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/levinas/
1

AMA Computer CollegeCebu

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL,
practical philosophy and ethical inquiry has been revolving around
the Self. Emmanuel Levinas proposes the other way round, ethics as
the first philosophy.
Levinas philosophy is a criticism of the whole Western Philosophical
tradition the tradition of Being. Ethics as the first philosophy means
that it is prior to any other philosophical pursuits especially ontology
which focuses on being on the I. It is a call to a revolution against
knowledge and a paradigm shift towards what is otherwise than
being. From the traditional philos sophien, rendered in English as
the love of wisdom, Levinas proposed a revolution towards a
wisdom of love. But love here do not have the same meaning as
the word would imply to us at first hearing: i.e., erotic, emotional and
the like; rather it entails that the relationship with an other is given
more prominence than the relation of Being to its own self, a
relationship of responsibility towards the Other. Responsibility to the
other person precedes the very freedom of the self. Levinas argues
that it is the infinite responsibility of the Self towards the Other,4 a
shift from the focus on Being to the focus on the Other, that makes
one authentically being human. This happens in the epiphany of the
4
I used the terms I and the Self to mean the subject who is in front of the
Face of the Other while the term the same (le mme) was used as a corresponding
term to the the other (l autre); I translated autrui (the personal Other or you) by
Other, and autre by the word other following Alphonso Lingis translation
(which Levinas himself permitted).

AMA Computer CollegeCebu

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL,
Face,5 where one sees the Face of the Other with its precognitive
core; viz., being called by another and responding to that other.6 The
Face here does not stand only as a part of a whole but as a
representative of the wholeness, the absolute otherness, of the Other
his kalooban (inside/innermost self).
Levinas philosophy should be understood in the context of violence.7
There is violence in almost every level of life: individual,
interpersonal, and the social.8 This violence is rooted, as Spinoza
contended, in the desire of Being to preserve in its being. The natural
attitude of the Self to the things outside him, the extra-ego, is that of
assimilation. The I or the Self wants to assimilate, that is, to
synthesize everything to himself, making what is other part of the
5
Whereas, Levinas himself uses lowercase f in stating the face, we use the
term Face with a capital F in this thesis so as to designate it from the physical
face or the countenance of the Other. All citations containing the lowercase shall
retain it with the same meaning as that in our discussion which will always appear
starting with the uppercase F

6
cf. Emmanuel Levinas. Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/levinas/

7
By violence, Levinas means not only physical violence but also the violence of
reducing what is other into the same, specifically if it is done to a human Other. This
causes an attitude of allergy towards what is other, which leads to physical
violence as its extreme form.

8
cf. Eduardo Jose Calasanz, Ethics with a Human Face in
Commentaries on Moral Philosophy
3

AMA Computer CollegeCebu

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL,
same. Thus reducing the otherness of the Other. But this is a vain
enterprise so there arises an attitude of allergy towards the Other.
Here, physical violence is rooted.
In this paper, I will argue that the Other should be looked at as Face,
that is, as his kalooban and not be reduced into the Selfs categories,
otherwise one commits violence against the Other. This I will do by
utilizing two premises which will then constitute a hypothetical
syllogism: if the Other is absolutely other, then he should be looked at
as Face, that is, as his kalooban and not be reduced into the Selfs
categories, otherwise one commits violence against the Other; but,
the Other is absolutely other. These premises bring us to my thesis
statement as our conclusion.
The premises rest on the absolute otherness hypothesis, or
what Levinas calls the idea of Infinity. If the Other is absolutely notI (although he resembles me) then it means that trying to assimilate
him, putting him into categories that my mind manufactures, I being
the one giving meaning for his existence, is a violence against him; to
put him into my categories, to assimilate him, is to make him part of
me, robbing him of his otherness. This is the violence of Totalization
(that of making the Other part of me putting the other into the
totality of the same). Thus, I must look at him as a Face9 and let him
9

i. e., treat him in his otherness.

AMA Computer CollegeCebu

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL,
speak to me; this compels me to respond to him.10 By Face we do not
mean the countenance as a face but his kalooban, his inner self, in
contrast with mukha or the physical countenance.
To prove my argument, the following questions must be raised: first, is
the Other really other? How can I commit violence against the Other
by Totalization? What is the Face what does it mean to look at the
Other as Face? Why is the Face kalooban (inside) not mukha
(countenance)? What does looking at the Other as Face, i.e. as his
kalooban, entails?
To be guided in my discussion the following will be the path that
I will undertake. First, I will state the assumptions of my argument
and premises then I will explain it. Secondly, I will provide related
literature that will be vital for my argumentation. Then, I will answer
the above-mentioned questions. In doing so, I must first establish the
meaning of technical terms that Levinas is fond of using and will be
vital for my arguments and clarify the relationship of the Self to the
Other. Next is to prove the strength of my thesis by giving counterarguments and evaluate whether the arguments for justification were
defensible or not.
Levinas philosophy is a complex one wherein ethics is not just
ethics as we have it in our mind but also a criticism of ontology and
10

Thus, response-ability (responsibility)

5

AMA Computer CollegeCebu

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL,
philosophy and discusses metaphysics. Therefore, many issues were
dragged alongside. By this, I would like to clarify that my paper is
bound only on the issues concerning the otherness of the Other, the
concept of the Face as kalooban, and the way I relate to the Other
whether through Totalization or through the idea of Infinity. The Is
response to the Face of the Other, i.e., responsibility, will be tackled
but will not be delved deeply for it will require a separate paper.11 The
state of the il y a (there is) or the being which is not being, or that
which goes before Being will not be tackled.12 The implications of the
third party or the advent of the other Others which will render justice
and the violence it entails is not a part of this papers scope too.
Moreover, the Face of the Others testimony to Gods existence might
be mentioned but we will not delve in it for it also is good for another
thesis.
Why bother reading this and I writing this paper? This study is
relevant because of its emphasis on the question of violence and
relationship with the Other human person which is one of the most
important post-war philosophical themes. Another one is that Levinas
critique of Western Philosophys focus on Being and the same is a
11
Although not the main focus, responsibility should still be tackled due to its
importance to the given topic for it is the point of transcendence which Levinas
whole philosophy is concerned.

12

This will require a separate study

6

AMA Computer CollegeCebu

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL,
reorientation of philosophy from the realm of thinking into the
outskirts called praxis13, a philosophy dethroned from the ivory
tower14 and once again set in the homes of individuals as Socrates
did according to Cicero. Moreover, this is a contribution to the
literature on Levinas for, although hailed to be one of Europes, and
indeed one of the postmodern worlds most important modern thinker,
paradoxically, he has received so little attention from the academic
world, both in the Philippines and International epistemic
communities. Furthermore, this study is unique in a way that it is
focused not solely on Levinas concept of responsibility (as most
Levinasian philosophers highlight) but more emphasis is given to the
issue of violence, specifically that of annihilating the Other in the
violence of Totalization which we consciously or unconsciously do
every day and is the root of physical violence such as racism and
wars. But most importantly, this paper focused on Levinas concept of
the Face by translating the Face into the Filipino term kalooban. This
is not originally mine for I got the idea from Eduardo Jose Calasanz in
his article, Ethics with a Human Face but nevertheless I have

13

i.e., practice

14
I am indebted here in the imagery given by Prof. Amable Tuibeo. Cf. his
Introduction to Philosophy: A New Perspective

AMA Computer CollegeCebu

SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL,
elucidated it more extensively more than his brief explanation and any
other author.15

15
Honestly, I did not find anyone with this idea of translating the Face as
kalooban or loob aside from Calasanz himself.
8