Write a rigorously argued, thought-provoking essay on the following topic.

Write a rigorously argued, thought-provoking essay on the following topic. You will need to do library and/or internet research for
the present project. As well, you will need to search databases such as
the MLA bibliography for information on research and critical writing that
have been published on your subjects. Your list of secondary sources must indicate at least 4 or 5 texts consulted or
cited.

Begin your essay with a clear, nicely focused, and effectively worded thesis statement
and support your central claim with good reasons and strong evidence. Set 1” margins on all sides
of the page, use the 12-point font, and double-space your writing throughout. Adhere to the format and
documentation outlined in the MLA Handbook (9th
Edition):

Topic:
Emmanuel Levinas notes in Entre
Nous: Thinking of the Other, “through the face of the other, through his
mortality, everything that in the other does not regard me, ‘regards me.’ Responsibility
for the other—the face signifying to me ‘thou shalt not kill,’ and consequently
also ‘you are responsible for the life of this absolutely other other’—is
responsibility for the one and only. The ‘one and only’ means the loved one,
love being the condition of the very possibility of uniqueness” (186). In “The
Other’s Rights,” Jean-François Lyotard reasserts the Levinasian ethical command
“Thou shalt not kill” (“You shall not commit murder”) with a difference. In an
important sense, this ethical command is implicitly echoed in Toni Morrison’s essay
“Being or Becoming the Stranger” as well. What is the context-specific meaning
of the command in each of the above-mentioned essays? How does each address a
particular aspect of the relationship between self and Other? In what sense do
you agree or not agree that both Lyotard’s explicit assertion of “thou shalt
not kill” and Morrison’s implicit version of the command are closely related to
Levinas’s concept of Otherness, and yet at the same time broaden its parameters
of concern in their respective ways?

Proposal
(Pending Title)

Emmanuel
Levinas notes in Entre Nous: Thinking of
the Other, “through the face of the
other, through his mortality, everything that in the other does not regard me, ‘regards
me.’
Responsibility for the other—the face signifying to me ‘thou shalt not kill,’
and consequently
also ‘you are responsible for the life of this absolutely other other’—is
responsibility for the one
and only. The ‘one and only’ means the loved one, love being the condition of
the very
possibility of uniqueness” (186). In “The Other’s Rights,” Jean-François Lyotard reasserts the
Levinasian ethical command “Thou shalt not kill” (“You
shall not commit murder”) with a
difference. In an important sense, this ethical command is implicitly echoed in
Toni Morrison’s
essay “Being or Becoming the Stranger” as well.

What is the context-specific
meaning of the command in each of the above-mentioned essays?

How does each address
a particular aspect of the relationship between self and Other?

In what sense do you
agree or not agree that both Lyotard’s explicit assertion of “thou shalt not kill” and Morrison’s
implicit version of the command are closely related
to Levinas’s concept of Otherness, and yet at the same time broaden its
parameters of concern in their respective ways?

Introduction:
The
ethical command “Thou shalt not kill,” as articulated by Emmanuel Levinas,
stands as a foundational principle in discussions of responsibility and ethical
engagement with the Other. This essay explores how this imperative is
reaffirmed and expanded upon in the works of Jean-François Lyotard and Toni
Morrison. While Levinas lays the groundwork for understanding responsibility
for the Other, Lyotard and Morrison further illuminate its complexities through
their unique perspectives on power dynamics, identity formation, and the
nuances of human encounters.

The ethical imperative
“Thou shalt not kill,” as conceptualized by Emmanuel Levinas in
“Entre Nous: Thinking of the Other,” represents a profound engagement
with the notion of responsibility towards the Other. This study aims to dissect
the interpretations and extensions of this ethical command as articulated by
Jean-François Lyotard in “The Other’s Rights” and Toni Morrison in her essay
“Being or Becoming the Stranger.” By analyzing the context-specific meanings
and the dynamics of self and Other in their works, this essay explores the
agreement and divergence these authors have with Levinas’s concept of Otherness
and how they expand its boundaries.

Thesis
Statement:
In this
essay, I will argue that while Levinas’s concept of responsibility for the
Other serves as the foundational framework, Lyotard and Morrison expand its
parameters by addressing diverse aspects of power dynamics, identity formation,
and the complexities of human encounters, ultimately emphasizing the
importance of recognizing and respecting the unique humanity of the Other in
fostering ethical relationships and social justice.
My current thesis statement appears
overly broad; I intend to refine it to convey a more focused objective and
present a compelling argument that prompts deeper thought.

Body Paragraphs:

Levinas’s Ethical
Framework:
Introduce Levinas’s philosophy,
emphasizing the centrality of responsibility for the Other.
Discuss Levinas’s concept of the
face-to-face encounter and the ethical imperative derived from it.
Levinas’s Concept of
the Other:
Levinas introduces
the idea that the face of the Other inherently commands the self not to harm
but to be responsible for their well-being. This notion of ethical
responsibility is rooted in the uniqueness and inviolability of the Other. In
his philosophy, Levinas posits that this ethical relation transcends mere
cognition or understanding, embodying a pre-ontological imperative that forms
the foundation of human morality.
Lyotard’s Expansions:
Examine Lyotard’s reassertion of the
ethical command “Thou shalt not kill” in “The Other’s Rights.”
Analyze how Lyotard expands Levinas’s
framework by exploring the dynamics of power and interlocution in recognizing
the rights and personhood of the Other.
o
It
focuses on recognizing the Other’s rights and personhood through interlocution
and dialogue, affirming the ethical imperative against violence and oppression.

Lyotard’s Interpretation and
Extension:
Jean-François Lyotard reasserts Levinas’s command with a
nuanced difference. Lyotard’s focus shifts more towards the political and
social dimensions of this responsibility. He explores the implications of the
command in the broader context of justice and human rights, contemplating on
how societies and institutions can embody this responsibility towards the
Other. This expansion from individual ethics to a social and political
framework illustrates Lyotard’s unique contribution to the concept of Otherness.

Morrison’s Implicit
Echoes:
Explore how Morrison’s essay “Being
or Becoming the Stranger” implicitly echoes Levinas’s ethical imperative.
Discuss Morrison’s insights into the
dangers of Othering and the importance of recognizing the individuality and
humanity of the Other.

Morrison’s Implicit Echo:
Toni
Morrison, in “Being or Becoming the Stranger,” provides an implicit yet
profound exploration of Levinas’s command. Morrison delves into the narrative
and identity formation, particularly how individuals and societies perceive and
interact with the ‘stranger’ or the Other. Her work illuminates the subtleties
of the ethical command through the lens of cultural, racial, and historical
contexts, emphasizing empathy and understanding as crucial components of this
responsibility.

Intersectionality and
Complexity:
Highlight the intersections between
Lyotard’s and Morrison’s perspectives, noting their shared emphasis on the
complexities of human encounters and identity formation.
Discuss how their contributions
expand Levinas’s framework by addressing diverse social justice and ethical
responsibility aspects.
o
While
each essay approaches the command “Thou shalt not kill” from a distinct
perspective and context, they all reaffirm and converge on the fundamental
ethical principle of recognizing and valuing the Other as a unique and
deserving individual. In this sense, they contribute to the ongoing dialogue
surrounding Levinas’s concept of Otherness and its implications for ethical
responsibility and human relationships.
Comparative Analysis:
The examination of these three perspectives reveals both
convergences and divergences in their understanding and expansion of the
ethical command. While all three thinkers acknowledge the intrinsic value and
singularity of the Other, their approaches in contextualizing this relationship
vary significantly. Levinas’s focus on the moral and existential responsibility
is complemented and extended by Lyotard’s political and societal dimensions and
Morrison’s cultural and narrative considerations.

Conclusion:
Ultimately,
the essays of Lyotard and Morrison reaffirm and expand upon Levinas’s
foundational principle, emphasizing the importance of recognizing and
respecting the unique humanity of the Other in fostering ethical relationships
and social justice. They remind us of the imperative to uphold the ethical
command “Thou shalt not kill” in actions and our attitudes and interactions
with others. In doing so, they invite us to strive towards a more compassionate
and just world where the dignity and worth of every individual are upheld and
respected.

Conclusion:
The exploration of Levinas, Lyotard, and Morrison’s
works underscores the multifaceted nature of the ethical command “Thou
shalt not kill” in relation to the Other. Each author contributes uniquely
to the discourse, expanding the parameters of concern surrounding the self’s
responsibility to the Other. This comparative analysis not only reaffirms the
complexity of ethical relations in human experience but also highlights the
need for an interdisciplinary approach in understanding and applying these
ethical imperatives in diverse contexts.