Wikipedia Deep Dive

Emmanuel Levinas

12 min read

What does it mean to look into another person's face? For most of us, it's an everyday occurrence we rarely think about. But for Emmanuel Levinas, this simple act—the encounter with another human face—contains the entire foundation of ethics, the very meaning of what it is to be human, and perhaps even a trace of the divine.

Levinas turned philosophy on its head. While Western thinkers from Plato to Heidegger had spent millennia asking questions about being, existence, and knowledge, Levinas insisted they had it backwards. The fundamental question isn't "What can I know?" or "What does it mean to exist?" The fundamental question is: "What do I owe to the person standing in front of me?"

A Life Shaped by Catastrophe

Emmanuel Levinas was born in 1906 in Kaunas, Lithuania, then part of the Russian Empire. He came from what he would later describe as a middle-class Litvak family—Litvak being the Yiddish term for Lithuanian Jews, a community known for its rigorous intellectual tradition and its distinctive approach to Talmudic study.

His childhood was defined by upheaval. When World War One erupted, his family fled to Kharkiv in Ukraine, where the ten-year-old Levinas witnessed both the February and October revolutions of 1917. Imagine being a child watching the collapse of one world and the violent birth of another. The family eventually returned to Lithuania in 1920, where Levinas attended a Jewish gymnasium before leaving for France in 1923 to begin his university education.

At the University of Strasbourg, two things happened that would shape the rest of his life. First, he began studying phenomenology, a philosophical method that tries to describe the structures of experience as they present themselves to consciousness. Second, he met Maurice Blanchot, beginning a lifelong friendship that would later save his family from annihilation.

In 1928, Levinas traveled to Freiburg, Germany, to study with Edmund Husserl, the founder of phenomenology, and there he encountered Martin Heidegger. Heidegger's philosophy of Being and Time had just been published the year before, and Levinas was captivated. He became one of the first French intellectuals to bring German phenomenology to France, translating Husserl's Cartesian Meditations in 1931 and writing extensively about both thinkers.

Then came the war.

The Face Behind the Barbed Wire

Levinas became a French citizen in 1939, just as Europe was about to tear itself apart. When France declared war on Germany, he enlisted as a translator of Russian and French. During the German invasion of 1940, his unit was surrounded and captured. He would spend the next five years as a prisoner of war in a camp near Hanover.

His status as a prisoner of war, protected by the Geneva Conventions, saved him from the concentration camps where six million Jews were murdered. But his protection was partial at best. He was assigned to a special barrack for Jewish prisoners, forbidden from practicing any form of religious worship. Meanwhile, his father and brothers were shot by the SS in Lithuania. His mother-in-law was deported and never heard from again.

Back in France, Maurice Blanchot risked his own life to hide Levinas's wife and daughter in a monastery, keeping them safe throughout the occupation. Blanchot also managed to maintain contact between Levinas and his family through smuggled letters—small acts of humanity in a world gone mad.

Other prisoners in the camp noticed something about Levinas: he was constantly jotting in a notebook. Those jottings, made in the shadow of genocide, would become his first major philosophical works: Existence and Existents and Time and the Other, both published shortly after the war.

Reckoning with Heidegger

Here is one of the strangest facts in twentieth-century philosophy: Martin Heidegger, perhaps the most influential philosopher of his generation, joined the Nazi Party in 1933 and served as rector of Freiburg University, implementing Nazi policies in academia. He never clearly apologized or explained this support after the war.

For Levinas, this was not merely biographical scandal. It was a philosophical problem of the highest order. How could the thinker who had so brilliantly analyzed human existence have been so catastrophically wrong about ethics? How could a philosophy of being fail so completely when it came to the most basic moral questions?

Levinas came to believe that Heidegger's failure was not accidental. It was built into the very structure of Western philosophy. For two thousand years, philosophers had asked questions about being, about existence, about knowledge—what Levinas called "ontology." But ontology, he argued, was inherently violent. It tried to comprehend the Other, to make the Other into an object of knowledge, to fit the Other into the self's categories of understanding.

The Holocaust was not an aberration. It was the logical culmination of a philosophical tradition that had always prioritized knowledge over responsibility, being over ethics.

The Face of the Other

Against this tradition, Levinas proposed something radical: ethics as first philosophy. Not epistemology (the study of knowledge), not ontology (the study of being), but ethics—our fundamental obligation to other people—as the starting point for all philosophical inquiry.

The key to Levinas's ethics is the concept of "the face." When you encounter another person face to face, something irreducible happens. You cannot fully comprehend that person. You cannot make them into an object of your knowledge. Their face presents itself to you as absolutely other, infinitely beyond your categories and concepts.

And this encounter makes a demand on you.

Levinas wrote that the face says, before anything else, "Do not kill me." Not in words—the demand is prior to language, prior to thought, prior to your freedom to accept or refuse. The face commands, and you are already responsible before you have decided whether or not to accept that responsibility.

This is radically different from how most moral philosophers think about ethics. Usually, we assume that moral obligations arise from some principle we've rationally accepted, some social contract we've agreed to, some calculation of consequences. For Levinas, responsibility comes first. You are held hostage by the Other's face, infinitely obligated, before any calculation or agreement is possible.

"I owe the Other everything," Levinas insisted. "The Other owes me nothing."

The Wisdom of Love

Levinas liked to play with the meaning of the word "philosophy." In Greek, philosophia means "love of wisdom." But Levinas wanted to reverse this: philosophy should be the "wisdom of love." The goal is not to accumulate knowledge, but to understand what it means to love—to be responsible for—another person.

This might sound sentimental, but Levinas was not talking about warm feelings. The love he describes is demanding, even uncomfortable. It is the weight of infinite responsibility, the impossibility of ever doing enough for the Other. When I encounter your face, I become responsible for your mortality, your suffering, your hunger. I can never fully discharge this debt.

There is a theological dimension to this, though Levinas was careful to avoid straightforward religious language. The face, he said, bears a "trace" of the divine. Not God directly, but a trace—like a footprint left by someone who has already passed. The commandment "Thou shalt not kill" echoes in every human face, a divine authority that somehow operates without divine presence.

Levinas called this the "illeity" of the face—from the French "il," meaning "he." The Other comes to me not just as a "thou" I can address, but as a "he," a third person, bearing the weight of an absence. It is this absence, this trace of the divine, that gives the face its infinite moral authority.

Otherwise Than Being

Levinas's first major work, Totality and Infinity, published in 1961, laid out his basic vision. The "totality" of the title refers to systems of thought that try to encompass everything, to reduce all otherness to sameness. "Infinity" refers to what escapes such systems—the Other who can never be fully comprehended, the ethical demand that can never be satisfied.

But Levinas wasn't finished. In 1974, he published Otherwise Than Being or Beyond Essence, a book even more radical and difficult than the first. Here he argued that responsibility for the Other is not just something that happens to us from outside. It constitutes us. Subjectivity itself—the very fact of being a self—is formed through subjection to the Other.

The first line of Otherwise Than Being sets up the fundamental question: "Everyone will readily agree that it is of the highest importance to know whether we are not duped by morality." Is ethics real, or is it just an illusion we've invented to make social life possible? Levinas's answer is that ethics is more real than anything else. It is the ground of our very existence as selves.

This is a complete reversal of how most philosophers think about persons and obligations. Usually, we assume that first there are individual selves, and then these selves enter into relationships and take on obligations. For Levinas, the relationship comes first. I become a self through my responsibility for you.

Controversy and Criticism

Levinas's philosophy has never been without critics. As early as the 1950s, Simone de Beauvoir—the existentialist philosopher and feminist—accused him of defining the subject as necessarily masculine, with the feminine relegated to the status of Other. Levinas did write about "the feminine" in ways that can sound deeply problematic to contemporary ears, associating it with dwelling, hospitality, and a kind of welcoming passivity.

Some feminist philosophers, like Bracha Ettinger, have defended Levinas, arguing that his account of the feminine is more complex than it first appears. Others have doubled down on the criticism, pointing to his broader French nationalism and his relative silence on colonialism—particularly striking given that he spent decades running a Jewish school in Paris during the Algerian War.

Then there are the philosophical objections. Is it really possible to build an entire ethics on the face-to-face encounter? What about justice, which requires treating people impartially rather than responding to whoever happens to be in front of you? Levinas addressed this by introducing "the third"—the fact that there are always other Others, making demands that conflict with one another, requiring us to make judgments and create institutions. But critics have wondered whether this addition undermines his entire project.

Influence and Legacy

Despite the controversies, Levinas became one of the most influential philosophers of the twentieth century. His most famous student was Jacques Derrida, the founder of deconstruction, who wrote an important early essay on Levinas called "Violence and Metaphysics" and delivered a moving eulogy at Levinas's funeral in 1995.

Jean-Luc Marion, himself a major philosopher, claimed that France had produced only two great philosophers in the twentieth century: Henri Bergson and Emmanuel Levinas. Whether or not you agree with this assessment, it captures something of Levinas's stature in Continental philosophy.

His influence has spread far beyond academic philosophy. The Belgian filmmakers Jean-Pierre and Luc Dardenne have cited Levinas as crucial to their cinematic ethics—their films obsessively return to moments of face-to-face encounter, when characters must respond to the demands of another person. Film scholars have traced Levinas's influence through an entire genre of "cinema of redemption."

For thirty years, Levinas gave weekly talks on Rashi—a medieval French rabbi and Biblical commentator—every Saturday morning at the Jewish school he directed. He also published several volumes of Talmudic readings, bringing his philosophical insights to bear on ancient Jewish texts. In this, he embodied what he had learned from his postwar teacher, the mysterious Mr. Chouchani, a wandering Talmudist whose brilliance and personal history remain obscure to this day.

The Face in the Age of AI

Levinas died on Christmas Day, 1995, just as the internet was beginning to transform human communication. He did not live to see social media, video calls, or artificial intelligence. But his philosophy poses questions that have only become more urgent.

What happens to the face-to-face encounter when we increasingly meet each other through screens? Can a digital representation of a face make the same ethical demand as a face in the flesh? When we interact with AI systems designed to simulate human conversation, are we encountering an Other, or merely an infinitely sophisticated mirror reflecting our own categories back at us?

Levinas would likely have been skeptical of any technology that promised to replicate or replace human connection. The whole point of the face is that it escapes our categories, surprises us, makes demands we did not anticipate. An AI, no matter how sophisticated, operates within the parameters its creators have established. It cannot truly be Other in Levinas's sense.

And yet his philosophy also suggests a response to our technological moment. If ethics is first philosophy, if responsibility for the Other is the ground of our humanity, then no technology can absolve us of that responsibility. The question is never whether we can avoid the face of the Other, but whether we are willing to see it—in the homeless person we pass on the street, in the refugee fleeing war, in the worker whose labor makes our comfort possible.

The face, Levinas taught, always commands: "Do not kill me." In a world of increasing abstraction, where violence can be enacted at a distance, where algorithms make decisions about who gets a loan or who gets surveilled, his insistence on the primacy of the face-to-face encounter feels less like mysticism than like a desperately needed corrective.

Philosophy, Levinas said, should be the wisdom of love. After Auschwitz, after his father and brothers were murdered by the SS, after watching the philosopher he had most admired embrace fascism, Levinas dedicated his life to understanding what that might mean. The answer he arrived at was both simple and infinitely demanding: look at the face before you. You are already responsible.