From Life to Existence: A Reconsideration of the Question of Intentionality in Michel Henry’s Ethics

<p>Michel Henry has renewed our understanding of life as immanent affectivity: life cannot be reduced to what can be made visible; it is – as immanent and as affectivity – radically invisible. However, if life <em>(la vie) </em>is radically immanent, the living <em>(le vivant...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Frédéric Seyler
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University Library System, University of Pittsburgh 2012-12-01
Series:Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy
Subjects:
Online Access:http://jffp.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/jffp/article/view/530
id doaj-4de226cf5ce94c7dbbb8005be1496246
record_format Article
spelling doaj-4de226cf5ce94c7dbbb8005be14962462020-11-24T22:50:22ZengUniversity Library System, University of PittsburghJournal of French and Francophone Philosophy1936-62802155-11622012-12-012029811510.5195/jffp.2012.530511From Life to Existence: A Reconsideration of the Question of Intentionality in Michel Henry’s EthicsFrédéric Seyler0DePaul University Chicago<p>Michel Henry has renewed our understanding of life as immanent affectivity: life cannot be reduced to what can be made visible; it is – as immanent and as affectivity – radically invisible. However, if life <em>(la vie) </em>is radically immanent, the living <em>(le vivant</em>) has nonetheless to relate to the world: it has to <em>exist</em>. But, since existence requires and includes intentional components, human reality – being both living and existing – implies that immanence and intentionality be related to one another, even though they are conceived at the same time as radically distinct modes of appearing in Henry’s phenomenology of life. Following this line of thought, we are faced with at least two questions: First, what reality does immanent appearing have for us as existing and intentional beings? And second, from an ethical point of view, what does Henry’s opposition of “barbarism” and “second birth” mean in terms of existence? As will be shown, it follows from the standpoint of radical phenomenology itself that immanent affectivity has reality <em>for us</em> only insofar as it finds its expression or translation in the realm of the intentionally visible and that, with regard to ethics, both “barbarism” and its overcoming in “second birth” are effective only insofar as they are mediated through representations. Henry’s critique of representation and intentionality needs therefore to be revised, especially in the field of practical philosophy, where the essential role played by intentionality has to be acknowledged even by radical phenomenology.</p>http://jffp.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/jffp/article/view/530AffectivityRadical PhenomenologyEthics
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Frédéric Seyler
spellingShingle Frédéric Seyler
From Life to Existence: A Reconsideration of the Question of Intentionality in Michel Henry’s Ethics
Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy
Affectivity
Radical Phenomenology
Ethics
author_facet Frédéric Seyler
author_sort Frédéric Seyler
title From Life to Existence: A Reconsideration of the Question of Intentionality in Michel Henry’s Ethics
title_short From Life to Existence: A Reconsideration of the Question of Intentionality in Michel Henry’s Ethics
title_full From Life to Existence: A Reconsideration of the Question of Intentionality in Michel Henry’s Ethics
title_fullStr From Life to Existence: A Reconsideration of the Question of Intentionality in Michel Henry’s Ethics
title_full_unstemmed From Life to Existence: A Reconsideration of the Question of Intentionality in Michel Henry’s Ethics
title_sort from life to existence: a reconsideration of the question of intentionality in michel henry’s ethics
publisher University Library System, University of Pittsburgh
series Journal of French and Francophone Philosophy
issn 1936-6280
2155-1162
publishDate 2012-12-01
description <p>Michel Henry has renewed our understanding of life as immanent affectivity: life cannot be reduced to what can be made visible; it is – as immanent and as affectivity – radically invisible. However, if life <em>(la vie) </em>is radically immanent, the living <em>(le vivant</em>) has nonetheless to relate to the world: it has to <em>exist</em>. But, since existence requires and includes intentional components, human reality – being both living and existing – implies that immanence and intentionality be related to one another, even though they are conceived at the same time as radically distinct modes of appearing in Henry’s phenomenology of life. Following this line of thought, we are faced with at least two questions: First, what reality does immanent appearing have for us as existing and intentional beings? And second, from an ethical point of view, what does Henry’s opposition of “barbarism” and “second birth” mean in terms of existence? As will be shown, it follows from the standpoint of radical phenomenology itself that immanent affectivity has reality <em>for us</em> only insofar as it finds its expression or translation in the realm of the intentionally visible and that, with regard to ethics, both “barbarism” and its overcoming in “second birth” are effective only insofar as they are mediated through representations. Henry’s critique of representation and intentionality needs therefore to be revised, especially in the field of practical philosophy, where the essential role played by intentionality has to be acknowledged even by radical phenomenology.</p>
topic Affectivity
Radical Phenomenology
Ethics
url http://jffp.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/jffp/article/view/530
work_keys_str_mv AT fredericseyler fromlifetoexistenceareconsiderationofthequestionofintentionalityinmichelhenrysethics
_version_ 1725672768132874240