사랑의 윤리학

• 영문명: Ethics of Love
• 발행기관: 한국비평이론학회
• 저자명: 민승기(Seungki Min)
• 간행물 정보: 『비평과 이론』제9권 제2호, 119~149쪽, 전체 31쪽
• 주제분류: 어문학 > 영어와문학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2004.12.01

영문 초록

The primary goal of this essay is to articulate how the love which manifests itself as the excessive giving enacting the violence on the pleasure principle or the economic circle begets the right to be ethical It is love that moves from One through Two to One-less In other words, it transforms from eras seeking the fantasy of wholeness through philos emphasizing the absolute difference to agape implying the inner fracture of the difference itself Odysseus who wanted to possess the unity of One returns as a foreigner to himself(the external difference changes into internal splitting, which leads to One impossible to integrate into the whole, not-All in Lacanian sense. Zizek calls this One negativity, not negation), after negating himself(negation requires Two irreducible to each other) In (anti)Hegelian Journey of love m which host always returns as a guest-friend, the negation of negation renders negation as such lacking, far from resulting m sublated affirmation Just as Hegel proclaims that 'The Spirit is a bone,' so Odysseus returns not as a transcendental subject resulting from the enlargement of consciousness but as objet a, irreducible objective element within subject, a remainder escaping the circle of subjective appropriation The journey ranging from substance through siginfier to objet a is completed. To begin with, this essay is confronted with love as philos which pays attention to the possibility of "there is no friend" inherent in the apostrophe, "O my friends" As for Derrida, Levinas, aud Blanchot, love, first and foremost, is the insurmountable distance from the Other In this case, it can be said that the distance or difference implies the ethical in thai it requires us to respect the alterity of the Other which remains an incomprehensible secret to the subject However, the problem is the possibility that pure otherness of the Other functions as a way of avoiding or postponing the ethical encounter with the Other Put otherwise, it isn't enough only to point out that the transcendence of the subject is merely transferred to the transcendence of the Other This is why, through the argument of love as pure gift, this essay comes to the fore the ontological status of love which inscribes in phenomena certain gap not possible to be filled up Here what is striking is that the gap is not the infinite distance between the Thing in itself and its appearance but the minimal difference between two appearances Agape demands us to consider the insurmountable gap to be transposed into Thing(Other) itself. For the unknowability of love derives from radical splitting of the Other, not from the absolute Otherness of the Thing itself. Zizek defines this change from the irreducible difference of the Other to the irreducible difference within the Other as the movement from substance to subject Transcendental substance already inhabits m the subject but at the same time in the form of which the subject is never aware, as object-gaze in Lacanian sense, Only when objet a arising from the place where the lack of the subject is overlapped on the lack of the Other is offered as the object of love does love attain the ethical status

목차

참고문헌

Abstract