Bøger af John Llewelyn

The early medieval Scottish philosopher and theologian John Duns Scotus shook traditional doctrines of universality and particularity by arguing for a metaphysics of 'formal distinction'. Hundreds of years later, why did the 19th-century poet and self-styled philosopher Gerard Manley Hopkins find this revolutionary teaching so appealing? John Llewelyn answers this question by casting light on various neologisms introduced by Hopkins and reveals how Hopkins endorses Scotus' claim that being and existence are grounded in doing and willing. Drawing on modern responses to Scotus made by Heidegger, Peirce, Arendt, Leibniz, Hume, Reid, Derrida and Deleuze, Llewelyn's own response shows why it would be a pity to suppose that the rewards of reading Scotus and Hopkins are available only to those who share their theological presuppositions.

Pursuing Jacques Derrida's reflections on the possibility of "religion without religion," this book makes room for a sense of the religious that does not depend on religions or traditional notions of God or gods. It shows why and where religion matters.

Following Levinas's philosophical works in roughly chronological order, Llewelyn finally brings his work to a wider audience.

Focusing on the idea of universal suffrage, John Llewelyn accepts the challenge of Derrida's later thought to renew his focus on the ethical, political, and religious dimensions of what makes us uniquely human. Llewelyn builds this concern on issues of representation, language, meaning, and logic with reflections on the phenomenological figures who informed Derrida's concept of deconstruction. By entering into dialogue with these philosophical traditions, Llewelyn demonstrates the range and depth of his own original thinking. The Rigor of a Certain Inhumanity is a rich and passionate, playful and perceptive work of philosophical analysis.

If not simple opposition or simple juxtaposition, what is the relation between the writings to which Derrida and Levinas appose their signatures? What would each endorse in the writings of the other? What is it to sign and endorse? How does one assume responsibility, and how does one avoid assuming it? This book addresses these questions.