PHI 200 02W Problems in Philosophy

Phase III Culminating Written Assignment

Due: The day of our final exam

“A Levinasian Response to Genocide in Rwanda”

In this written assignment you are to reflect on the dehumanization and genocide that occurred in Rwanda in 1994. The project for this paper is to reflect on the extent to which Levinas offers an ethical thought that is uniquely appropriate for an age (our age) in which genocide has occurred so frequently.

The first section of the paper will be the introduction. You will need a topic sentence, sentences delineating the parts and a sentence suggesting the conclusion. (We will work on this together in class as in the case of the previous two written assignments.)

In the second section of the paper discuss the historical conditions (colonialism and “Race Science”) of the catastrophe insofar as --as Gourevitch writes-- “the Belgians had made ‘ethnicity’ the defining feature of Rwandan existence” (G 57). Recall that in 1933 the Belgians conducted a census as a prelude to issuing Hutu and Tutsi identity cards. (G 56) In other words, consider the extent to which the objectification of the ethnic groups, an objectification introduced by colonial race science, led to dehumanization and genocide. Further, in this section provide pertinent detail regarding the human suffering, including the pace and ferocity of the genocide as well as personal accounts/stories. Make direct reference (extract passages and provide page numbers) to Philip Gourevitch’s book, We wish to inform you that tomorrow we will be killed with our families: Stories from Rwanda. Also, refer, with the greatest specificity possible, to the film "Hotel Rwanda".

In the third section of the paper discuss Levinas’s ethical thinking in comprehensive detail. Discuss Levinas’s concept of “the face” as an ethical relation. Consider especially the extent to which the face escapes objectification: “It is what cannot become a content, which your thought would embrace; it is uncontainable, it leads you beyond” (L 86-87, my emphasis). Consider the extent to which this escape from objectification is a “rupture” for Levinas, a rupture that would interrupt any dehumanizing objectification. Rather than an ethics based on universality or totality –universal law or overarching system-- Levinasian ethical thought emphasizes one’s singular responsibility for the Other. Indeed, for Levinas, responsibility provides the very structure of subjectivity. (L 95) In this apparently paradoxical sense, subjectivity is not for itself, but “for the other” (L 96, my emphasis). We are, as Levinas states, “hostage” to the other through this structure of subjectivity as responsibility. Our responsibility for the other is nonreciprocal. (L 98) We always, as Levinas insists, have one more responsibility to attend to as we are subject to the face and call of the Other. We are responsible for responsibility itself.

In the fourth and concluding section of the paper consider the extent to which Levinas offers an ethical approach that is uniquely appropriate for an age in which genocide has occurred so frequently. Further, specifically, reflect on the extent to which Levinasian thought offers a resource for the interruption of the dehumanizing objectification that led to genocide in Rwanda.

Your paper must have an introduction (including a topic sentence and sentences delineating the parts of the paper) and a conclusion. Your paper must be no less than four pages and no more than six pages, typed and double-spaced. I encourage you to ask questions about the assignment in class, meet with me in my office (by appointment) to discuss the paper, and/or to bring me a draft of your paper for review.