• A
  • A
  • A
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • ABC
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
  • А
Regular version of the site

Article

РЕЦЕНЗИЯ НА КНИГУ АДОНИСА ФРАНГЕСКУ “LEVINAS, KANT AND THE PROBLEM OF TEMPORALITY”.

Frangeskou’s point of departure in his juxtaposition of Levinas and Kant is the problem of transcendental schematism and not the tension between autonomy and heteronomy as in most of the published literature. Thus the middle ground between Levinas and Kant is occupied by Heidegger, but also by Franz Rosenzweig with his “biblical” version of ecstatic temporality. Levinassian diachrony is described by Frangeskou as a new form of ecstatic temporality, different from those of Heidegger and Rosenzweig, and as an analogue of transcendental schematism of reason. We briefly compare Frangeskou’s interpretation with Marc Richir’s notion of transcendental schematism which also goes back to Levinassian diachronic temporality. Richir’s schematism functions as a medium joining together heterogenous elements such as the layer of ‘phenomenological’, that is, unstable and flickering sense, and the layer of ‘symbolic’, that is, organised and stabilised sense. In a similar way, for Frangeskou, diachronic temporality provides a synthesis (though not synchronisation) of God, world and man.