Vision and voice: Phenomenology and theology in the work of Jean-Luc Marion

Chapter

Abstract

The kind of phenomenology that can be useful to theology will be a hermeneutical phenomenology, one that takes us beyond the Cartesian/Husserlian ideal of presuppositionless intuition. It will also be a phenomenology of inverse intentionality, one in which the constituting subject is constituted by the look and the voice of another. In light of these suggestions, the phenomenology of Jean-Luc Marion is defended against three critiques, namely that it compromises the boundary between phenomenology and theology, that the theology it serves is a bad one to boot, and that it has an inadequate account of the subject. At the heart of this defense is Marion’s clear distinction between phenomenology as a description of possible experience, and theology as the claim that a certain kind of experience, namely revelation or epiphany, is not merely actual but veridical. Phenomenology says, If revelation occurs it will be in the form of a saturated phenomenon. Theology says, for example, the burning bush was an epiphany, or Jesus Christ is a revelation. The attentive reader should have no trouble distinguishing Marion’s phenomenological analyses, which should be persuasive to believer and unbeliever alike, from his theological claims. Marion’s account of the subject falls under the heading of inverse intentionality, and there are hints that vision is aufgehoben in the voice. The seer is first of all the one seen, but above all the one addressed, called forth into response-able being.

Keywords

Hegel Hermeneutics Husserl Intentionality Kierkegaard Marion Phenomenology Ricoeur Theology Transcendence 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bernet, R. (1994). La vie du subjet. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carlson, T. A. (1999). Indiscretion: finitude and the naming of god (pp. 203–214). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Derrida, J. (1995). The gift of death (pp. 54–56). Chicago: University of Chicago Press [Translated by D. Wills].Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Heidegger, M. (1998). Phenomenology and theology. In W. McNeill (Ed.), Pathmarks. NewYork: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Husserl, E. (1981). Husserl’s departure from Cartesianism. In L. Landgrebe & D. Welton (Eds.), The phenomenology of Edmund Husserl: six essays. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Husserl, E. (1983). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy: first book. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff (Translated by F. Kersten].Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Janicaud, D., Courtine, J.-F., Chrétien, J.-L., Henry, M., Marion, J.-L. & Ricoeur, P. (2000). Phenomenology and the “theological turn:” The French debate. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    John of the Cross, St. (1991). The collected works of St. John of the Cross. Washington, DC: ICS Publications [Translated by Kieran Kavanaugh, O.C.D. and Otilio Rodriguez, O.C.D.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Keyes, G. S., Dorn, R., Rishel, J. J., Sachs, K., Shackelford, G. T. M., Soth, L., & Sund, J. (2000). Van Gogh face to face: the portraits. New York: Thames and Hudson.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and infinity. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press [Translated by A. Lingis].Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Levinas, E. (1983). Beyond intentionality. In A. Montefiore (Ed.), Philosophy in France today. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Levinas, E. (1996). Is ontology fundamental? In A. T. Peperzak, S. Critchley & R. Bernasconi (Eds.), Basic philosophical writings. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Levinas, E. (1998). God and philosophy. In Of god who comes to mind. Stanford: Stanford University Press [Translated by B. Bergo].Google Scholar
  14. 15.
    Marion, J.-L. (1991) L’Interloqué (pp. 242–243). In Cadava, E., Conner, P. & Nancy, J.-L. (Eds.) Who comes after the Subject? New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Marion, J.-L. (1997). Metaphysics and phenomenology: a summary for theologians. In G. Ward (Ed.), The postmodern god. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Marion, J.-L. (2001). The idol and distance (pp. 19–20). New York: Fordham University Press [Translated by Thomas A. Carlson].Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Marion, J.-L. (1998). Reduction and givenness: investigations of Husserl, Heidegger, and phenomenology. Evanston: Northwestern University Press [Translated by Thomas A. Carlson].Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ricoeur, P. (1967a). Husserl: an analysis of his phenomenology. Evanston: Northwestern University Press [Translated by Edward Gl. Ballard & Lester E Embree].Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ricoeur, P. (1967b). The symbolism of evil. New York: Harper and Row [Translated by E. Buchanan].Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ricoeur, P. (1981). The task of Hermeneutics. In Hermeneutics and the human sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ricoeur, P.(1970). Freud and philosophy: an essay on interpretation. New Haven: Yale University Press [Translated by D. Savage].Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ward, G. (1998). The theological project of Jean-Luc Marion. In Blond, P. (Ed.), Post-secular philosophy. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ward, G. (1991). La Croisée du visible. Paris: La Difference.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Westphal, M. (1999). In God, the gift, and postmodernism. J. D. Caputo & M. J. Scanlon (Eds.), Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Westphal, M. (1984). God, guilt, and death: an existential phenomenology of religion (pp. 1–12). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Westphal, M. (1990). Taking St. Paul seriously: sin as an epistemological category. In T. P. Flint (Ed.), Christian philosophy. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Westphal, M. (1998). Suspicion and faith: the religious uses of modern atheism. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Westphal, M. (1999/2001). Overcoming onto-theology (pp. 154–161). New York: Fordham University Press & University Press.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell [Translated by G. E. M. Anscombe].Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wolterstorff, N. (1995). Divine discourse: philosophical reflections on the claim that god speaks. New York: Cambridge.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zimmerli, W. (1982). I am Yahweh. Atlanta: John Knox Press [Translated by Douglas W. Stott].Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Philosophy DepartmentFordham UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations