Erika Natalia Molina Garcia

Este artículo retoma la cuestión del espacio en Gilles Deleuze. Examinamos al respecto tres motivos: un concepto original de cartografía, una teoría de las geografías afectivas, y un análisis de los vectores «territorializantes» y «desterritorializantes» que determinan las transformaciones de las identidades colectivas. A través de estos tres momentos, la espacialidad deviene en los trabajos de Gilles Deleuze la piedra angular de una renovación de la vocación crítica de la filosofía. Dejando de ser un objeto de reflexión entre otros, la espacialidad se vuelve un esquema de pensamiento, una manera de plantear problemas y de construir conceptos, donde ya no se trata de construir una filosofía de la geografía, sino una «geofilosofía».

Drawing on phenomenological aesthetics and on the haptic aesthetics of eating as a form of everyday aesthetics, I examine the phenomenon of eating our own as meaningful in three dimensions: vital/natural, somatic/individual, and cross-cultural. Usually conceived as a concrete, rare, and foreign practice, I show how cannibalism is present in our daily lives, both symbolically and as a liminal possibility towards which – as Freud noticed in 1913 – we all tended as children. Cannibalism is present not only in cinematic, literary, or visual art, and in anthropological research that situates it far from “us,” but through narratives and carnal dispositifs of differentiation/assimilation of the Same and the Other, fundamental for our subjective constitution. I conclude with a reflection on how the classical aesthetics of the sovereign subject develops towards alternative models like Pelluchon’s gourmet ego that re-establish the connexion and moral engagement lost by solipsism by means of alimentary metaphors, but also romanticizing them, failing to address the problem of voracity and overconsumption, both at a social and at an individual level. This is more suitably addressed by Viveiros de Castro’s idea of a cannibal cogito, but even better understood by Emmanuel Levinas’ enjoyment-contact model of subjectivity.

The work of Emmanuel Levinas has been both abundantly recognized and criticized in moral philosophy. This Janus-faced attitude is also present in ecological theories, which find fertile ground in Levinas’ thought without being able to explain its apparent anthropocentrism. Opposing hermeneutical paths tend to focus either on otherness as an absolute alterity, implying a potentially unlimited responsibility for all alterities, or on otherness as a re-foundation of humanism, leading to the conclusion that responsibility is unlimited only among humans. Here I seek to disentangle Levinas from these two extreme interpretations, first by reviewing ecological readings of his philosophy, in both the Francophone and Anglophone spheres, and second by analyzing specific Levinasian terms that might be particularly helpful for a non-anthropocentric or deep ecology. The main results of this investigation are a distinction between the ethics of responsibility and the ethics of vulnerability, an explanation of Levinasian compulsory or methodological humanism, and a schematic model of sensibility as enjoyment/vulnerability capable of supporting deep ecology without the traditional notions of free will, rights, or values.

Intentando responder por el cambio que significa la filosofía contemporánea occidental respecto a su pasado, y a través del análisis de nociones tradicionales de movimiento y cuerpo, mostramos el lazo que une dirección, coreografía y las propias expectativas actorales del danzante, a ciertas concepciones muy particulares de verdad y fidelidad, arraigadas en ideas de tiempo y espacio que son desactivadas en la práctica de la danza, sobre todo en sus fases de investigación corporal, donde aparecen más bien danzas insignificantes y espacios vividos, refractarios a las lógicas del espacio objetivo, el escenario y el espectador