Hospitality as a key to the relationship with the other in Levinas and Derrida

Abstract

This article looks at the theme of hospitality with a focus on the work of two twentieth-century French philosophers, Emmanuel Levinas and Jacques Derrida. It begins with a presentation of some of Levinas' Jewish writings relevant to the theme. These writings display Levinas' understanding of the nature of freedom in regard to the other, who holds me hostage. Yet, the article argues, this leaves Levinas still to some extent bound by the I, even the I as hostage. The dilemma is further investigated with reference to Jacques Derrida, starting with his own reflections on Levinas. The article then outlines Derrida's own ideas on hospitality, asking how to reconcile the impossible demands of pure hospitality with the conditional forms it takes in our societies. The conclusion asks what the two writers have to say to European societies in their current encounters with refugees and migrants.

‘Multicultural lunches’: sharing food in post-Brexit south coast of England

“…The possibilities and limits of openness are significant to current discussions of migration (Friese 2010; Still 2010), migration and 'otherness' (Noble & Noble 2016), ways of relating/responding to the 'other' (Barnett 2005;Popke 2003), the treatment of refugees and asylum seekers (Ahmed 2000), and the rights of strangers (Cavallar 2017).…”

“…Levinas offers detailed and dense rationale for his reasoning, which includes the moral worth of the self and the potential for a politics of tolerance and justice (Noble and Noble 2016). This combination of morality and governance means that his perspective can be viewed in terms of political theology (Gauthier 2007).…”

“…Welten 2015) have shown how Derrida extends the philosophical debate to interrogate the close relation between hospitality and hostility that is engendered by unconditional hospitality (e.g., his concept: hostipitality). By considering the complex conditions of hospitality, Derrida raises interesting questions surrounding, for example, the host as hostage (Noble and Noble 2016;Westmoreland 2008), and the complex nature of reciprocity and non-reciprocity (Still 2010). Best (2016) argues that Bauman takes a sociological, as opposed to a purely philosophical perspective, to the notion of hospitality and the treatment of strangers.…”

Contemporary Religiosity and the Absence of Solidarity With Those in Need

“…Thus, a relativist fundamentalism is a perfect epistemological underpinning for the post-truth and post-justice society, a perfect ground for that type of self-centered spirituality which petrifies one's self-interests as the ultimate. The post-modern critique can help in deconstructing such fundamentalism as well, to unmask it as an illusion, and to revive creativity, playfulness, and freedom necessary for re-establishing communication that would avoid both the dualist and the monist tyranny (Dolejšová (Noble) 2001, 33-43;Noble 2002;Noble 2005;Noble and Noble 2016).…”