Anthropology through Levinas (Further Reflections): On Humanity, Being, Culture, Violation, Sociality, and Morality

Rapport, Nigel

doi:10.1086/701595

Cited by 11 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moore's concept seems to echo Kearney's proposal of an ethical imagination from 1988, in addition to notions of a moral imagination developed by philosophers of moral pragmatism (see Fesmire, 2003; Johnson, 1985, 1987, 1993; Kekes, 2006; Lederach, 2005; Nussbaum, 1990; Tierney, 1994), despite making no reference to these scholars. Although this may be interpreted as a short-coming, we believe that Moore's emphasis on the role of imagination in self-other relations as well as for ethical and moral positionings can serve as a starting point for further anthropological studies, particularly those who forefront interpersonal relationships (compare with Rapport, 2019).…”

Section: Related Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Imagination theory: Anthropological perspectives

Rohrer

Thompson

2022

Anthropological Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The term imagination and its derivatives often serve as points of departures, yet a concise understanding of imagination in anthropology is lacking. In this paper, we argue for a contextualized anthropological approach to imagination; a complex notion which has been used to describe the human capacity to mentally (re)create that what is not materially present; the creative process of imagining; and the individual and social products of such a process. We address terminological particularities, conceptual differences, and related concepts in addition to discussing the importance of methods and the poetic imagination. In doing so, we consolidate and elaborate on previous analytical and conceptual works to provide a more explicit middle-range theory of imagination from an anthropological perspective. While we propose understanding imagination as a guiding action in situations of uncertainty or ignorance and emphasize focusing on everyday processes and practices, our discussions provide a framework to discuss and compare empirically grounded findings regarding imagination.

show abstract

Section: Related Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Imagination theory: Anthropological perspectives

Rohrer

Thompson

2022

Anthropological Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For Levinas (1991, pp. 210–13), a possible solution lies in a relation of “infinity,” or as Rapport (2015, p. 257; 2019, p. 78) suggests, building on Levinas's work, in venturing beyond any particular system of classification and maintaining the Other's individuality. In this article, I ask how establishing the infinity of the human and more‐than‐human Other may be conceived as a decolonizing project.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Face‐to‐face with the (animal) Other

Kavesh

2023

American Ethnologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The imperial underpinning of the early anthropology of Pakistan constituted “the other” as a subject of comprehension, categorization, and containment. Later, with the post‐9/11 geopolitical backdrop, anthropologists focused on selected themes such as religious and ethnic disparity and political nationalism, eliding some topics or groups. What would it mean for the anthropology of Pakistan to consider alienated themes and groups while emphasizing the infinity of the Other? How would conceiving the Other beyond a political or religious other, or even beyond a human subject, create a possibility of decolonizing the anthropology of Pakistan while exploring multiple futures—emergent, imagined, and expected? Such an approach critically moots a reexamination of theoretical, methodological, and epistemological tenets and urges the discipline to engage with diverse lifeworlds. It brings the face of the Other face‐to‐face with anthropology beyond humanity to consider all beings, intersubjective and collaborative experiences, and shared values.

show abstract

“…In this article, I want to examine further Levinas's thinking on humankind (see Rapport 2015; 2019 a ). What kind of anthropology can it be that accommodates the Levinasian insistence on not‐knowing and the non‐conceptual, while also claiming recognition of humanity and rightful respect for Anyone?…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tracing the density of human being: through a Levinasian anthropology of invisible otherness

Rapport

2022

Royal Anthropological Inst

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For Emmanuel Levinas, to study human nature is to 'liberate human beings from the categories adapted uniquely for things'. This, paradoxically, is to occupy a standpoint where the human 'no longer offers itself to our powers': to go beyond the category-thinking of cultural construction and to put what one consciously supposes -Self, Society, Culture, Nature -into question. The 'liberation' of human nature is an unconscious process that does not have the structure of intentionality but rather the character of inspiration. Examining the possible accommodation of a Levinasian philosophy within anthropology, this article pays particular attention to the human 'density of being' that, for Levinas, accompanies any individual life. It is impossible for Ego to know the Other, Levinas insists -subjectivity is 'secret', identity is 'invisible' -but otherness can nevertheless 'inspire' recognition and respect through its physical proximity. The article argues that a 'cosmopolitan' anthropology devoted to discerning the nature of a universal humanity might practise an artistry sufficient to identify the outline of that invisibility: the silhouette even if not the substance. Here are the traces of otherness that are evident, willy-nilly, when the densities of being of individual human lives impact upon one another in social milieux.To catch sight, in meaning, of a situation that precedes culture, to envision language out of the revelation of the Other (which is at the same time the birth of morality) in the gaze of a human being looking at another human precisely as abstract human disengaged from all culture, in the nakedness of his face, is to return to Platonism in a new way.Emmanuel Levinas, 'Meaning and sense ' (1996c [1964]: 58)I have understood a 'cosmopolitan anthropology' to signify the scientific study of a universal humanity and a universal human individuality, the spanning of a descriptive and analytic arc between the cosmos of the species and the polis of the individual organism or body. The proximate subject of such an anthropology is Anyone: the individual human embodiment that is in possession of species-wide capacities and responsible for then substantiating or effecting those capacities by way of a unique ontogeny (Rapport 2012). Fundamental to such an anthropology is a transcending of 'category-thinking' . As pithily summed up by Ernest Gellner: 'We are all human and should treat each other decently and with respect.

show abstract

Anthropology through Levinas (Further Reflections): On Humanity, Being, Culture, Violation, Sociality, and Morality

Cited by 11 publications

References 22 publications

Imagination theory: Anthropological perspectives

Imagination theory: Anthropological perspectives

Face‐to‐face with the (animal) Other

Tracing the density of human being: through a Levinasian anthropology of invisible otherness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About