A Phenomenological Midrash of Genesis 22
Chapter I: A Historical and Philosophical Sketch: Rosenzweig,Buber and Levinas 1
Chapter I A Historical and Philosophical Sketch: Rosenzweig, Buber and Levinas The [Greek concept Sophia] specifies a closed realm of thought, knowledge for its own sake. This is totally alien to [the Biblical word] hokmah, which regards such a delimination of an independent spiritual sphere, governed by its own laws, as the misconstruction of meaning… the severance of thought from reality. —Martin Buber1 The terms of life are not “essential” but “real;” they concern not “essence” but “fact.” —Franz Rosenzweig2 The presence of being in truth is grasp and appropriation, and knowledge is a tel- eological activity. —Emmanuel Levinas3 artin Buber, Franz Rosenzweig, and Emmanuel Levinas are part of a tradition in philosophy called dialogic. From a distance, they appear to be saying similar, if not the same, things. This is incorrect. They have notable differences with one another. However, this book is not exploring their differences. This chapter focuses on their shared concern with Hellenic philosophy. Their concerns often appear general and reductive. However, the importance of their shared insights outweighs their reductive generalizations about the Hellenic-Philosophical tradition. M 2 A The Undbinding of Isaac B Philosophically, Rosenzweig, Buber, and Levinas are generally con- cerned with two related issues. First, they believe that most traditional Hel- lenic-Christian-Philosophers act as if they are thinking alone in isolation, philosophizing alone in their quest for knowledge.4 This presupposes that the philosopher does not need the other, that is, anyone but him or herself; the philosopher is supposed to be able to find...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.