지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술대회자료
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2005.11
- 수록면
- 13 - 33 (21page)
이용수
이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (2)
- 이 논문의 후속연구가 궁금하신가요?
- 연관 학술논문 또는 학술발표를 통해 보다 발전된 연구결과를 확인하실 수 있습니다.
- 이 논문의 연구 히스토리 확인하기
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This study aims at comparing Lacan's psychoanalytic ethics and Levinas's ethics of the Other, focusing on the concepts of the Other. First of all, the ethics itself will be discussed to find out how ethics is advanced mainly to find ways for the happiness of human beings and formulate the principles for the happy lives of people. The ethics will be proved to be bifurcated with two major trends: one of philosophical characteristics with their focus on the ways of achieving the highest good, and the other of Judeo-Christian characteristics with their emphasis on the responsibility of the human beings in presence of the highest God.
After explanation of these two trends in preparation for the Kantian aspects in Lacan's psychoanalytic ethics and the Judeo-Christian concept of responsibility of the subject toward the other in Levinas's ethics, Lacan's ethics is defined in terms of the Lacanian concepts of 'objet a', drives and 'separation'. With the explication of these concepts Lacan's ethics proves to be focusing on the reclaiming the subject of aphanisis(disappearance) which is usually unacknowledged both by ego psychology and the subject himself. Ego psychology commits mistakes in its focus on ego only, instead of the unconscious and the subject neglects his true 'objectified' self in the form of 'objet a' by regarding his fantasied versions of this 'objet a' as his true selves. In the process, the figure of Antigone is presented as an ethical figure who claims her own desire to bury the dead brother in response to the call of 'objet a'.
Levinas' ethics of the 'Other' is discussed in connection with Heidegger for its emphasis on the ethics' need to focus more on concrete relations of the self with the other than on the Heideggerian ontological approaches to the Being. Levninas's ethics is explained in terms of his various concepts such as 'there is,' 'hostage, 'fatigue,' 'vigilance,''dwelling,' 'responsibility for the Other,' 'proximity to the Other,' etc. These concepts will be shown how Levinas regards the subject or the self as someone to be wholly dependent on the Other to the degree that the self is regarded as something to be transcended or overcome.
In conclusion, it is pointed out that by appearance Lacan's psychoanalytic ethics and Levinass's ethics have a lot in common, such as their focus on the concept of the Other, their insistence on the open structure of the woman as the Other, the splitting phenomena of language in the forms of 'saying' and 'the said,' etc. However, they are revealed to be much apart in the sense that while the Other is the supreme being for the self to be sacrificed for in Levinas' ethics, Lacan tries to claim back the other such as the unconscious and the woman which is neglected by consciousness-oriented philosophy and psychology as secondary. In a word Lacan is making efforts to present ethics which tries not only to encompass what is regarded as incidental to the major discourses of society but to reveal how the subject and the public discourses are dependent on the other, ' objet a' around which they form their fantasies and discourses in an effort to cover over the lack(undefinability) of 'objet a' as an empty structure.
After explanation of these two trends in preparation for the Kantian aspects in Lacan's psychoanalytic ethics and the Judeo-Christian concept of responsibility of the subject toward the other in Levinas's ethics, Lacan's ethics is defined in terms of the Lacanian concepts of 'objet a', drives and 'separation'. With the explication of these concepts Lacan's ethics proves to be focusing on the reclaiming the subject of aphanisis(disappearance) which is usually unacknowledged both by ego psychology and the subject himself. Ego psychology commits mistakes in its focus on ego only, instead of the unconscious and the subject neglects his true 'objectified' self in the form of 'objet a' by regarding his fantasied versions of this 'objet a' as his true selves. In the process, the figure of Antigone is presented as an ethical figure who claims her own desire to bury the dead brother in response to the call of 'objet a'.
Levinas' ethics of the 'Other' is discussed in connection with Heidegger for its emphasis on the ethics' need to focus more on concrete relations of the self with the other than on the Heideggerian ontological approaches to the Being. Levninas's ethics is explained in terms of his various concepts such as 'there is,' 'hostage, 'fatigue,' 'vigilance,''dwelling,' 'responsibility for the Other,' 'proximity to the Other,' etc. These concepts will be shown how Levinas regards the subject or the self as someone to be wholly dependent on the Other to the degree that the self is regarded as something to be transcended or overcome.
In conclusion, it is pointed out that by appearance Lacan's psychoanalytic ethics and Levinass's ethics have a lot in common, such as their focus on the concept of the Other, their insistence on the open structure of the woman as the Other, the splitting phenomena of language in the forms of 'saying' and 'the said,' etc. However, they are revealed to be much apart in the sense that while the Other is the supreme being for the self to be sacrificed for in Levinas' ethics, Lacan tries to claim back the other such as the unconscious and the woman which is neglected by consciousness-oriented philosophy and psychology as secondary. In a word Lacan is making efforts to present ethics which tries not only to encompass what is regarded as incidental to the major discourses of society but to reveal how the subject and the public discourses are dependent on the other, ' objet a' around which they form their fantasies and discourses in an effort to cover over the lack(undefinability) of 'objet a' as an empty structure.
목차
1. 서론: 기존의 윤리학적 배경
2. 쟈끄 라깡의 정신분석 윤리학
3. 레비나스의 ‘타자를 위한‘(being for the Other) 윤리학
4. 결론: 라깡의 타자성과 레비나스의 타자성의 차이
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
1990년대 초 이래의 한국기독교 사회윤리학의 동향
신학연구
2007 .12
-
한국 대학의 연구윤리교육 실태 분석
새한철학회 학술대회 발표논문집
2007 .11
-
Neither the Condition nor the Outcome of Ethics : Derrida, Levinas, and the Deduction of a Politics from Ethics
철학사상
2002 .12
-
레비나스와 정치적인 것(1) - 레비나스에서 국가의 문제, 국가 안에서 국가를 넘어
대동철학
2019 .01
-
중국 근대소설에 나타난 신구(新舊) 윤리관의 대치 : 부녀 윤리를 중심으로
중국어문학논집
2006 .10
-
기독교사회윤리로서 책임윤리에 대한 성찰
기독교사회윤리
2009 .01
-
불교윤리와 현대윤리학의 만남
불교학연구
2005 .01
-
Christian Ethics and Self-interest
Journal of Christian Education & Information Technology
2002 .04
-
리챠드 니버의 ‘응답의 윤리’(Ethics of Response)와 하우워와쓰의 ‘인격의 윤리’(Ethics of Character)와의 비교연구
장신논단
1994 .12
-
레비나스 타자윤리학과 탈현대윤리학
철학논총
2001 .01
-
기독교철학에서 본 윤리학의 특성과 전망
기독교사회윤리
2004 .01
-
라캉의 정신분석의 윤리에 대한 칸트철학적 비판
인간연구
2020 .01
-
윤리와 충동 : 칸트와 사드에 관한 라깡의 논의를 중심으로
현대정신분석
2002 .12
-
과학기술시대에 있어 응용윤리의 교육적 활용전망
철학연구
2010 .03
-
본회퍼와 레비나스의 타자의 윤리
신학연구
2015 .06
-
Global Ethic for a New World Order
원불교학
2001 .06
-
윤리학과 해체론 사이에서 : 레비나스와 데리다 가로지르기
새한영어영문학
2013 .02
-
에마뉘엘 레비나스의 타자윤리 : 마르틴 하이데거와 다르게 사유하기
철학
2008 .05
-
기독교윤리학과 한국교회
신학과 목회
2015 .05
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-185-015588882