This research project investigates Confucian thinker Dai Zhen (1724-1777) and Jewish thinker Emmanuel Levinas’s (1906-1995) philosophical discourses on desire from a comparative perspective. First, I look at Dai Zhen and Levinas individually each in their own philosophical contexts, while framing my readings with parallel structure that pivots on a hermeneutic strategy to examine their ideas of desire within the larger prospect of the human relation with transcendence. Then, my inquiry leads to a critical analysis of several interesting issues yielded in my interpretive readings of the two thinkers as regards transcendence and immanence and the self-other relationship. Methodologically, my study combines careful textual analysis, philosophical reflection, and historical sensitivity. We might want to say that there is in fact no correlative of the Levinasian desire in Dai Zhen’s philosophy. Dai Zhen’s notion of desire perhaps comes closer to Levinas’s concept of need. However, the disparity of their conceptual formulations does not keep us from discerning their shared ethical concern for the other, the weak, marginalized, and underprivileged group of society, which provides me the very ground for a dialogical comparison between the two thinkers. Henceforth, my writing is hinged on a comprehension of their conception of desire as an articulation of human striving for what is lying beyond themselves, as a redefinition of the being or essence of humankind in relation to the transcendent which in both philosophers’ ethical thinking is translated into a sympathetic understanding of and care for the other, particularly the stranger, the widow, the orphan, the young, the weak and the like. Through the comparative study of the two thinkers’ ideas of desire, I want to argue that “desire,” which is most readily directed to human egoism and instinctive propensity in both Confucian and Western philosophical traditions, can be at once the very driving force to open us to the other beyond ourselves and an actual moral creativity to produce ethical being out of material existence.

This doctoral thesis explores the literarity of reportage, with a focus on the 20th century and modern reportage. The aim is to describe the literary strategies used in modern text-based reportage and how these strategies relate to journalistic standards of credibility and ethics. A primary focus is the question of what the reportage is looking for in the literary, what happens to this literarity when it is used for journalistic purposes, and, in turn, how the literary establishes ethics in the text.        By suggesting that a piece of reportage is a journalistic text that simultaneously tells the story about the reporter’s encounter with the event, this dissertation sheds light on possible approaches to the concept of literarity: Subjectivity, narrativity, meta-narrative aspects, the poetic function of language and the performative movements in the text. The ethics of reportage is also to be derived from the encounter, and this thesis implements a concept of ethics in conversations with Emmanuel Levinas and dialogical philosophy. It provides an opportunity to separate ethics from moral, ideological and political dimensions of responsibility in the encounter. This aspect of ethics, where literarity and counter-movement operate beyond the direct intention, is what is needed to understand the reportage genre.      The dissertation also includes six longer reportage analyses embodying its results: Djuna Barnes’s, Vagaries Malicieux, Ryszard Kapuściński’s Another Day of Life, Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood, Hanna Krall’s A Tale for Hollywood, Sven Lindqvist’s Kina nu: Vad skulle Mao ha sagt? and Joan Didion’s, Slouching towards Bethlehem.

Cette analyse porte sur le schématisme des concepts purs de l’entendement, tel que présenté par Emmanuel Kant dans la Critique de la raison pure et interprété par Martin Heidegger. La lecture proposée par Heidegger est critiquée par un bon nombre de commentateurs dans la mesure où ils considèrent que son interprétation ne lui sert qu’à faire valoir ses propres théories philosophiques au sujet du Dasein et de l’ontologie fondamentale. Notre approche se distingue de la leur dans la mesure où nous tentons de comprendre les raisons qui ont poussé Heidegger à défendre l’interprétation du schématisme qui est la sienne. Notre étude s’attarde au texte de Kant de manière à en souligner les éléments qui ont permis à Heidegger d’établir sa lecture, telle qu’il la présente dans son ouvrage de 1929, ayant pour titre Kant et le problème de la métaphysique. La méthode utilisée est comparative, car notre but est de démontrer la valeur de l’interprétation heideggérienne contre celle des commentateurs qui le critiquent pour des raisons insuffisantes. Bref, le thème du schématisme kantien est analysé de long en large et la conclusion à laquelle nous parvenons est que Heidegger a permis des avancées philosophiques considérables par son herméneutique de la Critique et qu’il est nécessaire de leur accorder l’attention qui leur est due. / The subject of this analysis is the schematism of the pure concepts of understanding, as presented by Emmanuel Kant in The Critique of Pure Reason and interpreted by Martin Heidegger. The reading proposed by Heidegger is criticized by a large number of commentators because they consider that his interpretation only serves to give value to his own philosophical theories on Dasein and on fundamental ontology. Our approach is different from theirs in that we are trying to understand the reasons that justify Heidegger in his interpretation of schematism. Our study dwells on Kant's text in order to extract the elements that allowed Heidegger to build up his thoughts, as he presented them in 1929 in Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics. The method used is comparative, since our goal is to demonstrate the relevance of Heidegger's interpretation against the commentators who have insufficient reasons to criticize him. In short, the theme of Kant's schematism is analyzed thoroughly and the conclusion we come to is that Heidegger allowed for considerable philosophical progress with his hermeneutics of the Critique and that it is necessary to give them the attention they deserve.

This thesis examines the way genocide leaves marks in the writings of targeted people. It posits not only that these marks exist, but also that they indicate a type of psychological resistance. By focusing on the ways Holocaust diarists depicted Nazi perpetrators, and by concentrating on the ways language was used to distance the victim from the perpetrator, it is possible to see how Jewish diarists were engaged in alternate and subtle, but nevertheless important, forms of resistance to genocide. The thesis suggest this resistance on the part of victims is similar in many ways to well-known distancing mechanisms employed by perpetrators and that this evidence points to a “crisis of imagination” – for victims and perpetrators alike – in which the capability to envision negation and death, and to identify with the “Other” is detrimental to self-preservation.

Ce mémoire de maîtrise est une recherche exploratoire sur les expériences de localisation vécues dans l’espace urbain montréalais par des sujets en relation à l’information dite « de localisation ». La localisation est un processus d’orientation spatiale où l’emplacement d’un lieu dans l’espace est un problème à résoudre. Cette exploration est basée sur la théorisation de l’information proposée par Bateson (1972) et le développement du concept de dispositif par Belin (2002) et Agamben (2007) à la suite de Foucault, la localisation étant le concept empirique exploratoire. Le processus de localisation est investigué quant à son caractère médiatique : l’information de localisation est le medium qui, en étant un résultat et une cause de l’action, donne forme à ce processus mené par l’effort. Un travail de terrain ethnométhodologique déployé par le biais d’observations empiriques et d’entrevues qualitatives permet d’identifier certaines conditions qui rendent possibles, dans la vie quotidienne, les relations entre l’information de localisation, l’espace urbain et un sujet. Étant majoritairement vécue lors de déplacements présents, futurs ou passés, la localisation est ainsi conceptualisée en tant que wayfinding : l’action de déterminer quelles voies ou trajets emprunter pour se rendre d’un point A à un point B. Ce mémoire est en réalité une problématisation ouverte qui vise à explorer et identifier certains enjeux qui sont au cœur des processus de localisation dans l’espace urbain montréalais. Si « [l]e fait humain par excellence », comme le souligne Leroi-Gouhran (1965) « est peut-être moins la création de l’outil que la domestication du temps et de l’espace » (p. 139), le fait d’habiter en un certain temps et en un certain espace est en soi une relation problématique de confiance. Le vivant et le non-vivant habitent des espaces aménagés qui sont continuellement transformés par leur détermination mutuelle. En partant du constat que l’environnement construit se déploie en étant produit et aménagé dans des dispositions où certains de nos gestes sont délégués, peut-on envisager être libre sans (se) faire confiance ? / This master’s thesis is an exploratory research on localization experiences lived in Montreal’s urban space by subjects in relation to ‘location’ information. Localization is a spatial orientation process where a place’s location in space is a problem to be solved. This exploration is based on a theorization of information proposed by Bateson (1972) as well as on a development of the concept of apparatus (dispositif) by Belin (2002) and Agamben (2007) following Foucault’s; localization being an exploratory empirical concept. The localization process is investigated regarding its media character: location information is a medium that, being a result and a cause of action, shapes this process that is driven by effort. An ethnomethodological fieldwork is enacted by empirical observations and qualitative interviews that permit to identify certain conditions that make possible, in everyday life, relations between location information, urban space and a subject. Being mostly lived regarding actual, future or past movements, localization is thus conceptualized as wayfinding: the act of determining which path or trajectory to follow to get from point A to point B. This master’s thesis is actually an open problematization that aims to explore and identify some issues that are at the heart of localization processes in Montreal’s urban space. If “[t]he human act par excellence”, as put forward by André Leroi-Gouhran (1993 [1965]) “is perhaps not so much the creation of tools as the domestication of time and space” (p. 313), the fact that we dwell in a certain time and in a certain space is a problematic relation of trust (confiance) in itself. The living and the non-living inhabit spaces that are continuously transformed by their mutual determination. Starting from the observation that the built environment is deploying itself while being produced and developed (aménagé) in dispositions where some of our gestures are delegated, is it possible to consider being free without trusting?

This research project investigates Confucian thinker Dai Zhen (1724-1777) and Jewish thinker Emmanuel Levinas’s (1906-1995) philosophical discourses on desire from a comparative perspective. First, I look at Dai Zhen and Levinas individually each in their own philosophical contexts, while framing my readings with parallel structure that pivots on a hermeneutic strategy to examine their ideas of desire within the larger prospect of the human relation with transcendence. Then, my inquiry leads to a critical analysis of several interesting issues yielded in my interpretive readings of the two thinkers as regards transcendence and immanence and the self-other relationship. Methodologically, my study combines careful textual analysis, philosophical reflection, and historical sensitivity. We might want to say that there is in fact no correlative of the Levinasian desire in Dai Zhen’s philosophy. Dai Zhen’s notion of desire perhaps comes closer to Levinas’s concept of need. However, the disparity of their conceptual formulations does not keep us from discerning their shared ethical concern for the other, the weak, marginalized, and underprivileged group of society, which provides me the very ground for a dialogical comparison between the two thinkers. Henceforth, my writing is hinged on a comprehension of their conception of desire as an articulation of human striving for what is lying beyond themselves, as a redefinition of the being or essence of humankind in relation to the transcendent which in both philosophers’ ethical thinking is translated into a sympathetic understanding of and care for the other, particularly the stranger, the widow, the orphan, the young, the weak and the like. Through the comparative study of the two thinkers’ ideas of desire, I want to argue that “desire,” which is most readily directed to human egoism and instinctive propensity in both Confucian and Western philosophical traditions, can be at once the very driving force to open us to the other beyond ourselves and an actual moral creativity to produce ethical being out of material existence.

This dissertation examines the scope and limitations of the re-appropriation of the term barbarism by modern Jewish intellectuals in conversation with Third World social movements. Emmanuel Lévinas is my paradigmatic example of this re-appropriation, as his Talmudic interpretations illuminate this process, and his work is located on the axis of the encounter between Jewish and decolonial thinking. I contend that Lévinas follows a classic line of modern European interpreters who expressed their discomfort with the description of the Jewish people as barbaric. While this discomfort can be traced within this orthodox interpretation of Lévinas, I argue that his particular solution for the problem can only be explained by a more heterodox exploration. Lévinas’ positive re-appropriation of the term is part of contextual conversations that he sustained with other peoples characterized as barbarians (i.e. Third World decolonial theorists). While this re-appropriation was originally conceived in order to establish an East-East revolutionary conversation between Eastern European rabbinical interpreters and other radical Eastern projects (i.e. Maghrebi Marxism) it became an East-South decolonial conversation between Jewish and Afro-Caribbean/Latino-American intellectuals. This conversation, however, ultimately challenges the apologetic Jewish re-appropriation of exteriority in the concert of multiple barbarians. I explore the limitations of Jewish thought to engage with this community and cross from an apologetic to a critical barbarism. This dissertation, in conclusion, seeks to make an original contribution in the interrelation between Jewish and post-colonial studies. I aim to do so by first, demonstrating that the Jewish return to classical sources is historically and conceptually a decolonial counter-narrative that was influenced by (and in turn influenced) Third World discourses; second, explaining the reasons and consequences of the persistence of Jewish imagery and influences in Third World decolonial theory; third, exploring the limits of Jewish thinking and the benefits of the expansion of Jewish apologetical dialogues into barbaric critical conversations. And finally, challenging most contemporary scholarship in modern Jewish philosophy, which holds that Jewish thought and the modern re-reading of its sources can only be understood in the context of Western consciousness.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.