In his 2006 volume, Communion and Otherness , John Zizioulas pretty directly connects Western philosophy with the fall of Adam. Adam claimed to be God and thus “rejected the Other as constitutive of his being.” As a result, Self took “ontological priority over the Other,” with the result that “otherness and communion could not ultimately coincide.”
The priority of Self over Other marks Greek philosophy, with its equation of knowing and Being. Even in Husserl and Heidegger, the same principle holds. Husserl sees the Other as “an instrument of self-discovery,” which enables constitutes the Self. BUt this is true only in the sense that the Other “is constituted by me as constituting me: the I is primary; the Other exists because I exist and for me.” In Heidegger, the world functions as a “necessary medium” through which the Other is known, and this means that the Other cannot have a “constitutive role in ontology.” The Other is only “part of the ‘panoramic’ nature of existence,” and thus the particular being is always “within the horizon of Being, forcing us to identify it always with reference to the universal, and in this way ultimately to reduce the Other to the Same.”
In recent philosophy, Zizoulas finds a break with this tradition only in Buber and Levinas. But Levinas doesn’t deliver the goods: “Given that the Other we infinitely desire is one who attracts our Desire but does not himself desire us or any other, otherness finally evaporates in a Desire without the Other.” Desire never rests ultimately in the Other: “For Levinas the ultimate destination of Desire is not the Other but the Desire of the Other,” and Zizioulas strikingly notes the similarity with de Rougemont’s analysis of courtly love. So long as desire is the desire for desire, as it is for Levinas, the Self retains priority over the Other because the Self is the source of desire.
This is strikingly different from the Greek Fathers, “for whom God, the Other par excellence, as eros both moves outside himself and attracts to himslef as the ultimate destination of their desire those whose desire he provokes.” Desire is thus not a movement of the Self, but is evoked by the Other, God, and “there is an event of communion of Desire at the very heart of otherness.”
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…