You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The problem of 'We' - a reflection on the philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas
A good example of this is given in the book 'On Hospitality' by Jacques Derrida and Anne Dufourmantelle. Derrida talks about how when we meet a complete stranger, the first thing we ask is his or her name. We think this is a type of respect - because then we can name the other person according to his or her own name. It is a form of acknowledging the other, right? But what we forget, Derrida says, is that in asking somebody for his name, we already force a lot of things on this person. Derrida says that the real stranger, the refugee, is the perfect moment to evaluate how hospitable we are, how accepting of the Otherness of the Other we are. Do we ask his or her nationality, his or her name? What if he or she doesn't have a name, no paperwork, do we still accept him or her as a guest? Do we impose our language, do we only accept the person's name when we understand the language in which the response is offered?
I think I'm missing some of the context here. Why is the refugee the real stranger? And if by asking someone his/her name I'm forcing a lot of things on him/her, isn't that the case with everything I may ask?
Also what do you think is the proper use of "I" and "we"? Like an actual sentence with the difference. The example of Derrida you pointed seems to overflow with "we". Is that why you chose this as an example?
I did think about whether I use 'I' or 'we', as requested per @erh.germany's post, and mostly I use the 'I' format - only in one case I started typing 'we', to make a point of including everyone, but actually it was a fallacy, so I took it out.
Is that the same post I just read?
Btw I really enjoyed @erh.germany's latest post thanks to the links you provided.
Hmm, you're right. I didn't notice how many 'we' slipped into my review of Derrida's point. Maybe because the we is the Derridian we? Hmm. will have to check my own ideas about my writing, thanks for that!
The refugee for Derrida is a classic limit-figure. One that is not from the world we know, so the refugee is something from the outside that presents itself. It is a figure we don't know anything about, except that it is human. Derrida uses many more examples, but I feel this is an example we can relate to also in this time.
And yes, with everything you ask, you force something. Derrida makes the point of 'the name', as he says it's the first thing people ask. Who are you, where are you from? (I also wrote a post yesterday about this concept of the name as it appears in the work of Benjamin, or at least it's an attempt to raise the problem of 'naming' for Benjamin, which has obviously influenced Derrida here)
Thank you for the explanation.
So if I'm asked a question I'm being forced in some way? Instead of forced it looks more like influenced to me. But even then I am the one allowing to be influenced. I may choose to ignore the question, respond truthfuly or maybe lie. The decision remains with myself. I think people are too sensitive.
That being said I do think it's important to be aware of the language I use.
On the same topic, I've also noticed that a lot of people(my self included) tend to use "you" when preaching, nagging or lecturing someone. We can start with an innocent "we" and somehow end with an accusing "you", almost seeing the imaginary pointed finger.