E. Levinas「為他」倫理學及其德育蘊義

E. Levinas' Ethics of Responsibility-for-the-Other and its Implications for Moral Education

10.6910/BER.200709_(53-3).0003

張鍠焜(Huang-Kun Chang)

Levinas ； 他者 ； 為他人負責 ； Levinas ； the other ； responsibility-for-the-other

教育研究集刊

53:3期（2007 / 09 / 30）

67 - 92

繁體中文

西方倫理學一向著重於道德行動主體方面的研究，探討道德主體為什麼決定做出善的行動，以及如何決定什麼是善的行動。然而相對忽略了道德歷程中的另一因素──道德承受者。針對這樣的問題，西方在二十世紀興起了以道德承受者為研究核心的新倫理學。就此課題，Levinas「為他」倫理學具有重要貢獻。Levinas認為西方哲學一直有壓抑「他者」的傾向，其思想轉而以「為他」為核心。在人的生存型態的選擇上，他強調要走出自我持存的錮閉，而面向無限豐盈的他者世界。在倫理方面，Levinas認為應自「遵從自我的理性判斷或命令」，轉為遵從「他者面容的命令」或「為他負責的義務」。Levinas「為他倫理學」對道德教育甚具意義，有助開展不同於以往的德育實踐途徑。本文首先闡明Levinas「為他」倫理學之梗概。其次，討論其學說對於倫理學發展的重要意義。最後，討論其學理在實踐上可能遭遇的問題，以及在落實於道德教育時應著重哪些要點。

Most traditional western ethical theories emphasize the subjects of moral acts, in the meantime failing to consider the other side (the other person or object) of such acts. Traditional theories focus on the question of why moral subjects decide to perform or not perform certain moral acts, and how to judge what are morally ＂good＂ (＂right,＂ ＂just＂) actions. Thus the objects or ＂receivers＂ of moral actions have no place in these theories. In contrast, more recent (and ＂postmodern＂) ethical theories in the west tend to focus on the ＂other＂ person, the recipient of a moral act, the one for the sake of whom it is performed. Among these new ethical thinkers, the French-Lithuanian philosopher Emmanuel Levinas has had a far-reaching influence. Levinas thinks that western philosophy has consistently suppressed ＂the other＂; he takes the ＂for-theother＂ as the core of his philosophy. He suggests that the traditional western idea of oneself as the essential ＂being＂ leads to intolerance; rather, we need to think first of the other (not the self), take responsibility for the other. Our responsibility for the other is our unavoidable duty. Levinas' new approach to ethics has significant implications for moral education. The purpose of this paper is to explicate the ethical thought of Levinas, to discuss the significance and limits of his theory, and to elucidate its implications for education (in Taiwan).

1. Cohen, R. A.,E. Levinas (Trans.)(1985).Ethics and infinity.Pittsburgh, PA:Duquesne University Press.
2. Cohen, R. A.,E. Levinas (Trans.)(1987).Ethics and infinity.Pittsburgh, PA:Duquesne University Press.
3. Davis, C.(1996).Levinas: An introduction.Cambridge, UK:Polity.
4. Heidegger, M.,D. F. Krell (Ed.)(1977).Martin Heidegger basic writings.New York:Harper and Row.
5. Levinas, E.,A. Lingis, (Trans.)(1988).Existence and existents.Dordrecht, Netherlands:Kluwer Academic.
6. Levinas, E.,A. Lingis, (Trans.)(1991).Otherwise than being or beyond essence.Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer Academic.
7. Levinas, E.,A. Lingis, (Trans.)(1985).Ethics and infinity.Pittsburgh, PA:Duquesne University Press.
8. Levinas, E.,A. Lingis, (Trans.)(1969).Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority.Hague, The Netherlands:Martinus Nijhoff.
9. Levinas, E.,J. Robbins (Ed.)(2001).Is it righteous to be? Interviews with Emmanuel Levinas.Stanford, CA:Stanford University Press.
10. Levinas, E.,M. Smith,B. Harshav, (Trans.)(1998).Entre Nous: On thinking-of-the-other.London:The Athlone Press.
11. Levinas, E.,S. Hand (Ed.)(1989).The Levinas reader.Oxford, UK:Basil Blaekwell.
12. 杜小真(1994)。勒維那斯。臺北市:遠流。
13. 孫向晨、沈奇嵐譯、E. Levinas著、童慶炳主編(2004)。文化與詩學第一輯。上海市:上海人民。
14. 蔡美麗(1990)。胡塞爾。臺北市:三民。

1. 郭慧根(2018)。論人之尊嚴：憲法解釋與概念溯源。人文社會科學研究，12(3)，1-23。
2. 林涓(2013)。羽球雙打搭檔關係研究：以他者為中心的反省。身體文化學報，17，111-122。
3. 劉慧雯(2017)。建構「倫理閱聽人」：試論社群媒體使用者的理論意涵。新聞學研究，131，87-125。
4. 羅文興(2014)。E. Lévinas 為他倫理學的師生關係之探究。教育科學期刊，13(2)，125-145。
5. 鄭惠觀、洪如玉(2016)。責任、回應與愛的教育：Levinas 他者倫理學之啟示。嘉大教育研究學刊，37，57-82。
6. 鄭暐凡(2023)。與狼同行：從《愛爾蘭風土誌》及《狼行者》思考我他關係之流變。英美文學評論，42，1-29。
7. (2010)。從西方哲學重構台灣教育的主體性。教育資料與研究，96，27-48。
8. (2014)。法律的壓制性與創造性—人權與人口販運法制的被害者主體。政大法學評論，137，33-98。
9. (2016)。Nel Noddings「教學即關係性實踐」之析論。教育研究學報，50(1)，1-22。