Totality And Infinity…

Great, now I just had to open up Totality and Infinity (see posts below) and look through beneath the idiotic notes over the years to page 133 of the English version. This comes after Levinas’s description of the relation between elements and enjoyment:

Enjoyment—as the ultimate relation with the substantial plenitude of being, with its materiality—embraces all relations with things. The structure of Zeug as Zeug {Heidegger’s equipment} and the system of references in which it has its place do indeed manifest themselves, in concerned handling … but do not encompass the substantiality of objects.

Otherwise put, Levinas ultimately argues that Heidegger reduces beings to Zeug and, as such, commits the problem of the Gestell he identifies later (at least I can say I worked in what I was prepping to teach here). He concludes, “Dasein is never hungry,” since everythign is marked by usage but not “satisfaction” (134). This begins to make me wonder, since I come at Levinas from the political/ethical angle and G.H. comes at him from another, if there isn’t a fundamental tension in Levinas between one side and the other, one that presents the Other as a human Other over whom I am always violating, and the phenomenological side that has a thought of the “substantiality of objects” that is Other than its elements. But yeah, I’m going to copy this section and throw it on my syllabus, just because I want to read it again… (Thanks Graham–I actually mean that…) Not least because I’m looking at the section on sensibility…