ONLINE FIRST
published on March 30, 2021
Brigitta Keintzel
https://doi.org/10.5840/levinas202132913
The Other as Categorical Imperative: Levinas¡¯s Reading of Kant
For Kant and Levinas, the categorical imperative is the only possible formula for universalization. It has a structural necessity. Its claim is ultimate, valid without exception, and therefore reason-based. What differentiates Levinas from Kant is Kant¡¯s assumption that ¡°pure reason, practical of itself¡± is ¡°immediately lawgiving.¡± Levinas contradicted this form of reason legislating itself as an end in itself: according to Levinas, reason has no self-generated power. Although both agree that the achievement of an ethical insight depends on ¡°passivity,¡± in contrast to Kant Levinas does not consider this ¡°passivity¡± to be part of a conceptual insight. Its place is outside the subject. Instead of an ¡°archetype¡± that already exists in the subject, Levinas advocates the conception of a counter-image whose form is based on the face. This face is not speechless. His speech is based on a universalizable commandment, namely the commandment: You shall not kill me. In its full extent, this claim can only be understood via a body-based understanding of the categorical imperative.