In this article, I am going to consider the different ways in which Levinas talks about God and about His role in the ethical relationship. In order to do this, I will start by considering the elements that remain constant throughout the work of the author. In particular, I will indicate three specific characteristics: inessentiality, non-cognitiveness and being sense of the ethical relation. Secondly, I will analyze the way in which Levinas, in his Philosophical notes and in a 1962 conference, talks about God as “metaphor of metaphors”. I will try, then, to explain why this idea has been abandoned by Levinas, in favour of the notions of “trace” and “enigma”. These two notions, indeed, are developed by Levinas in order to radicalize the non-phenomenality of God until to consider him absent. Indeed, God “comes to mind” in the face of the other man, but He is never directly present: it is a trace that testifies to the passage of something that is not there anymore. This peculiarity of God makes it so that His revelation is never complete but, on the contrary, He conceals Himself to the point of effacement.
Dio metafora delle metafore. L'idea di Dio in Levinas dalla metafora alla traccia
Silvia Dadà
2019-01-01
Abstract
In this article, I am going to consider the different ways in which Levinas talks about God and about His role in the ethical relationship. In order to do this, I will start by considering the elements that remain constant throughout the work of the author. In particular, I will indicate three specific characteristics: inessentiality, non-cognitiveness and being sense of the ethical relation. Secondly, I will analyze the way in which Levinas, in his Philosophical notes and in a 1962 conference, talks about God as “metaphor of metaphors”. I will try, then, to explain why this idea has been abandoned by Levinas, in favour of the notions of “trace” and “enigma”. These two notions, indeed, are developed by Levinas in order to radicalize the non-phenomenality of God until to consider him absent. Indeed, God “comes to mind” in the face of the other man, but He is never directly present: it is a trace that testifies to the passage of something that is not there anymore. This peculiarity of God makes it so that His revelation is never complete but, on the contrary, He conceals Himself to the point of effacement.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
