Life, death and (inter)subjectivity: realism and recognition in continental feminism

  • Pamela Sue Anderson


I begin with the assumption that a philosophically significant tension exists today in feminist philosophy of religion between those subjects who seek to become divine and those who seek their identity in mutual recognition. My critical engagement with the ambiguous assertions of Luce Irigaray seeks to demonstrate, on the one hand, that a woman needs to recognize her own identity but, on the other hand, that each subject whether male or female must struggle in relation to the other in order to maintain realism about life and death. No one can avoid the recognition that we are each given life but each of us also dies. In addition, I raise a more general, philosophical problem for analytic philosophers who attempt to read Continental philosophy of religion: how should philosophers interpret deliberately ambiguous assertions? For example, what does Irigaray mean in asserting, ‘Divinity is what we need to become free, autonomous, sovereign’? To find an answer, I turn to the distinctively French readings of the Hegelian struggle for recognition which have preoccupied Continental philosophers especially since the first half of the last century. I explore the struggle for mutual recognition between women and men who must face the reality of life and death in order to avoid the projection of their fear of mortality onto the other sex. This includes a critical look at Irigaray’s account of subjectivity and divinity. I turn to the French philosopher Michèle Le Doeuff in order to shift the focus from divinity to intersubjectivity. I conclude that taking seriously the struggle for mutual recognition between subjects forces contemporary philosophers of religion to be realist in their living and dying. With this in mind, the lesson from the Continent for philosophy of religion is that we must not stop yearning for recognition. Indeed, we must even risk our autonomy/divinity in seeking to recognize intersubjectivity.


Ambiguity Autonomy Beauvoir Body Feminist Fluidity Hegel Intersubjectivity Irigaray Le Doeuff Life Love Mortality Natality Reciprocity Recognition Sovereignty Subjectivity 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anderson P.S. (1993). Ricoeur and kant: A philosophy of the will. Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson P.S. (1998). A feminist philosophy of religion: The rationality and myths of religious belief. Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson P.S. (2001). Gender and the infinite: On the aspiration to be all there is. International Journal of Philosophy of Religion, 50(1–3): 191–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anderson, P. S. (2002a). Introduction. Women’s Philosophy Review, 29(9) (Special issue on philosophy of religion).Google Scholar
  5. Anderson P.S. (2002b). Ricoeur’s reclamation of autonomy: Unity, plurality and totality. In: Wall J., Schweiker W., Hall W.D. (eds), Paul Ricoeur and contemporary moral thought. Routledge, London, (pp. 15–31)Google Scholar
  6. Anderson P.S. (2003). Autonomy, vulnerability and gender. Feminist Theory, 4(2):149–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Anderson P.S. (2004). An epistemological-ethical approach to philosophy of religion: Learning to listen. In: Anderson P.S., Clack B. (eds), Feminist philosophy of religion: Critical readings. Routledge, London (pp. 87–102)Google Scholar
  8. Anderson P.S. (2005). What’s wrong with the god’s eye point of view: A constructive feminist critique of the ideal observer theory. In: Harris H.A., Insole C.J. (eds), Faith and philosophical analysis, Heythrop studies in contemporary philosophy, religion and theology. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Aldershot, Hants (pp. 85–99)Google Scholar
  9. Anderson, P. S., Le Doeuff, M. A woman in philosophy and in dialogue. (Manuscript-in-progress, under review).Google Scholar
  10. Anderson, P. S. Unselfing in love: A contradiction in terms. In: H. Vroom, W. Stoker & J. Schrijvers (Eds.), Faith in the Enlightenment. Currents of Encounter Series The Netherlands, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  11. Anderson, P. S. A woman in philosophy. In: M. Le Doeuff (Eds.), A woman in philosophy and in dialogue.Google Scholar
  12. Bauer N. (2001). Simone de Beauvoir, Philosophy, & Feminism. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Burke C., Schor N., Whitford M. (eds), (1994). Engaging with Irigaray: Feminist philosophy and modern European thought. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Butler J. (1987). Subjects of desire: Hegelian reflections in twentieth-century France. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. Butler J. (2000). Antigone’s claim: Kinship between life and death. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Butler J. (2004). Undoing gender. Routledge, New York/LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. Butler, J. (2005). On being beside oneself: On the limits of sexual autonomy. In: Undoing gender (chapter 1); Reprinted in: N. Bamforth (Ed.), Sex rights: The Oxford amnesty lectures 2002 (pp. 48–78). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Camus A. (1971). The Rebel. Penguin, Harmondsworth (Translanted by A. Bower).Google Scholar
  19. Canters H., Jantzen G.M. (2005). Forever fluid: A reading of Luce Irigaray’s elemental passions. Manchester University Press, ManchesterGoogle Scholar
  20. De Beauvoir S. (1948). The ethics of ambiguity. Philosophical Library, New York. (Translated by B. Frechtman).Google Scholar
  21. De Beauvoir S. (1989). The second sex. Vintage Books, New York. A Division of Random House (Translated and edited by H. M. Parshley, Introduction to the vintage edition by Deirdre Bair).Google Scholar
  22. Feuerbach L. (1957). The essence of christianity (1841). Harper, New York (Translated by G. Eliot).Google Scholar
  23. Gheaus, A. (2005, submitted) Care and justice: Why they cannot go together all the way. PhD Thesis, University of Central Europe, Budapest, Hungary.Google Scholar
  24. Grosz E. (1993). Irigaray and the divine. In: Maggie Kim C.W., St Ville S.M., Simonaitis S.M. (eds) Transfigurations: Theology and the French feminists. Augsburg Fortress Press, Minneapolis, MN (pp. 199–214)Google Scholar
  25. Hegel G.W.F. (1977). The phenomenology of spirit. Oxford University Press, Oxford (Translated by A. V. Miller).Google Scholar
  26. Hegel G.W.F. (1991). Elements for the philosophy of right. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (pp. 268–276) (Translated by H. B. Nisbet).Google Scholar
  27. Hollywood A. (2002). Sensible ecstasy: mysticism, sexual difference and the demands of history. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  28. hooks b. (1990). Yearning: Race, gender and cultural politics. South Bend Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  29. Irigaray L. (1982). Passions élémentaires. Editions Minuit, Paris; Translated by Collie, J. & Still, J. (1992). Elemental passions. London: The Athlone Press.Google Scholar
  30. Irigaray, L. (1985). La Mystérique. In: Speculum of the other woman (pp. 191–202). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. (Translated by G. C. Gill); Also reprinted La Mystérique. In: M. Joy, K. O’Grady & J. L. Poxon (Eds.), French feminists on religion: A reader (pp. 28–39).Google Scholar
  31. Irigaray, L. (1993). Divine women. In: Sexes and genealogies. (pp. 55–72). New York: Columbia University Press (Translated by G. C. Gill).Google Scholar
  32. Jankélévitch V. (1981) Le Paradoxe de la morale. Le Seuil, ParisGoogle Scholar
  33. Jankélévitch V. (2005). Forgiveness. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (Translated by A. Kelley).Google Scholar
  34. Jantzen G.M. (1998). Becoming divine: Towards a feminist philosophy of religion. University of Manchester Press, ManchesterGoogle Scholar
  35. Joy M., O’Grady K., Poxon J.L. (eds) (2002). French feminists on religion: A reader. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  36. Keller M.L. (2003). Divine women and the Nehanda Mhondoro: Strengths and limitations of the sensible transcendental in a post-colonial world of religious women. In: Joy, O’Grady, Pozon (eds) Religion in French feminist thought. Routledge, London and New York (pp. 68–82)Google Scholar
  37. Kristeva J. (1987). In the beginning was love: Psychoanalysis and faith. Columbia University Press, New York Translated by A. Goldhammer, Introduction by O. F. Kernberg).Google Scholar
  38. Langer M. (2003). Beauvoir and Merleau-Ponty on Ambiguity. In: Card C. (ed) The Cambridge Companion to Simone de Beauvoir (chapter 4). Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  39. Le Doeuff M. (1991). Hipparchia’s choice: An essay concerning women philosophy, etc. Blackwell, Oxford (pp. 128–133, 243) (Translated by T. Selous).Google Scholar
  40. Le Doeuff M. (2003). The sex of knowing. Routledge, London (Translated by K. Hamer & L Code).Google Scholar
  41. Le Doeuff M. (2004). Towards a friendly transaltantic critique of the second sex. In: Grosholz E.R. (ed) The legacy of Simone De Beauvoir. Oxford University Press, Oxford (pp. 22–36).Google Scholar
  42. Le Doeuff, M. (2005). Women in dialogue and in solitude. 2004 Cassal lecture, University of London, 24 May 2004; published in The Journal of Romance Studies. 5(2) Summer.Google Scholar
  43. Lear J. (2005). Freud. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  44. Levinas, E. (1992). The ambiguity of love. In: Totality and infinity: An essay on exteriority. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. (Translated by Alphonso Lingis).Google Scholar
  45. Mahmood S. (2005). Politics of piety: The islamic revival and the feminist subject. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJGoogle Scholar
  46. Miller D. (1991). Liberty. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  47. Moore A.W. (2003). Noble in reason, infinite in faculty: Themes and variations on Kant’s moral and religious philosophy. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  48. Moore A.W. (1997). Points of view. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  49. Murdoch I. (1970). The sovereignty of good over other concepts, in her the sovereignty of good. Routledge & Kegan Paul, LondonGoogle Scholar
  50. Pozon J.L. (2003). Corporeality and divinity: Irigaray and the problem of the ideal. In: Joy M., O’Grady K., Poxon J.L. (eds) Religion in French feminist thought: Critical perspectives. Routledge, London and New York (pp. 41–50)Google Scholar
  51. Ricoeur P. (1967). The symbolism of evil. Harper & Row, New York/London (Translated by E. Buchanan).Google Scholar
  52. Rose G. (1995). Love’s work. Chatto & Windus Limited, LondonGoogle Scholar
  53. Rose G. (1997). Mourning becomes the law: Philosophy and representation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  54. Roth M.S. (1988). Knowing and history: Appropriations of Hegel in twentieth-century France. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NYGoogle Scholar
  55. Sartre J.-P. (1996) Being and nothingness. Pocket Books, New York (Translated by H. Barnes).Google Scholar
  56. Sartre J.-P. (1989). No exit and other plays. Vintage, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  57. Schott R.M. (2003). Beauvoir on the ambiguity of evil. In: Card C. (ed) The Cambridge companion to Simone De Beauvoir (Chapter 11). Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  58. Williams R.R. (1997). Hegel’s ethics of recognition. California University Press, Berkeley, CAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Regent’s Park CollegeOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations