Richard·A·Cohen‘s point about Emmanuel Levinas

承接上文

It is also clear that precisely because of his ethically based criticisms, Levinas will continue to appreciate the unsurpassed positivism of Husserl’s phenomenology. Because Husserlian phenomenology represents the limit case of scientific positivism, Levinas’s break with it, in the name of the higher vocation of ethics, is due not to some undetected fault or lack in his conception of science, in which case science could recuperate itself, but rather represents the essential priority of ethics over science, over science in its fullest, broadest, most universal sense. Husserl’s phenomenological conception of science, in other words, because of its depth and breadth, frees Levinas’s critique of science from any charge of “straw man.” Quite unlike Heidegger, Levinas fully recognizes and appreciates the great value of science, indeed, its essential contribution not only to the conveniences and health of society, but more profoundly to the universality and impartiality required by and for ajustsociety. It is not science but the hubris of science, its pretended hegemony, now even broader and deeper in its Husserlian guise, that Levinas criticizes. While Levinas’s assimilation of Heidegger’s ontology to palliate Husserl’s epistemology appears directly inThe Theory of Intuition, the superiority of science conceived on an intuitional rather than an experiential basis is derived from its theses.

同时，这也是很清楚的，由于其精确的基于伦理的判判，列维纳斯将要继续感激胡塞尔现象学卓越的实证。因为胡塞尔的现象学描绘（表现）了科学实证边界（极限）的情况，列维纳斯（却）以更高的伦理事业的名义与此断绝了关系（与此种哲学决裂），（这）并不仅仅是由于其科学概念中的某些未被发现的过失或缺陷，在这种情况中，科学能够使其自身恢复，而是在最充分的、最广泛的、最普遍的意义上描绘（表现）了伦理在科学之上（具有）根本的优先权。胡塞尔现象学的科学之概念，换句话说，（就是）因为其深度与广度，把列维纳斯对科学的批判从任何“稻草人”的控诉中解救出来（列维纳斯关于科学的批判不受任何“稻草人”的控诉影响）。完全不同于海德格尔，列维纳斯充分承认与欣赏科学的巨大价值，事实上，它根本的贡献不仅仅给社会带来了便利与健康，而且为正义社会带来了更深刻的普遍性与公正性，这也是正义社会所要求的。不是科学，而是科学的傲慢（无理）[而是傲慢的科学]，以及虚伪的霸权（以及其假装不称霸），（哪怕）是目前在胡塞尔花样翻新的广度与深度（意义上），列维纳斯都批判（之）。然而，列维纳斯用（吸收）消化了的海德格尔的本体论缓和了胡塞尔的认识论，（这）直接出现在《胡塞尔现象学中的直观理论》中，从其论文（列维纳斯的博士论文）中所导引出来的是基于直观的科学优越性的构想，而不是经验基础意义上的。