Givenness and God: Questions of Jean-Luc Marion

Notes

Notes Introduction Ian Leask and Eoin Cassidy 1. See Jean-Luc Marion, ‘‘The Voice Without Name: Homage to Lévinas ,’’ in his The Face of the Other and the Trace of God, ed. Jeffrey Bloechl (New York: Fordham University Press, 2000), pp. 224–42. 2. Derrida’s most extended treatment of the theme of the gift can be found in his Given Time, vol. 1, Counterfeit Money, trans. Peggy Kamuf (Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 1992)/Donner le temps, vol. 1, La fausse monnaie, in the series La Philosophie en Effet (Paris: Éditions Galilée, 1991). 3. See Robyn Horner’s comments in the introduction to her and Vincent Barraud’s translation of In Excess (IE), p. xi. Chapter 1. The Conceptual Idolatry of Descartes’s Gray Ontology: An Epistemology ‘‘Without Being’’ Derek J. Morrow I would like to thank Philipp W. Rosemann for his valuable comments on an earlier draft of this paper. 1. Dominique Janicaud, Le tournant théologique de la phénoménologie franc ̧aise (Paris: L’Eclat, 1991), English translation in Phenomenology and the Theological Turn: The French Debate (New York: Fordham University Press, 2000), pt. I: Dominique Janicaud, ‘‘The Theological Turn of French Phenomenology ,’’ trans. Bernard Prusak, pp. 16–103; for criticism leveled against Marion, see esp. pp. 50–66. For Marion’s response to Janicaud, see, inter alia, BG, 38–39 and 336, n. 80 (ED, 59–60 and 60, n. 1); BG, 71–74 285 and 342–43, nn. 1–6 (ED, 103–8: 104, nn. 1–2; 105, n. 1; 106, nn. 1–2; 107, n. 1); BG, 328, n. 8 (ED, 8, n. 4); BG, 340, n. 112 (ED, 91, n. 1). Janicaud in turn takes up the argument of Being Given in his La phénoménologie éclatée (Combas: Éditions de l’Éclat, 1998). For discussion of the debate in the literature , see John D. Caputo, ‘‘Derrida and Marion: Two Husserlian Revolutions ,’’ in Religious Experience and the End of Metaphysics, ed. Jeffrey Bloechl (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2003), pp. 119–34; Thomas A. Carlson, ‘‘The Naming of God and the Possibility of Impossibility: Marion and Derrida between the Theology and Phenomenology of the Gift,’’ in chap. 6 of Carlson, Indiscretion: Finitude and the Naming of God (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999), pp. 190–236; Jean Grondin, ‘‘La tension de la donation ultime et de la pensée herméneutique de l’application chez Jean-Luc Marion,’’ Dialogue 38 (1999): 547–59; Robyn Horner, Rethinking God as Gift: Marion, Derrida, and the Limits of Phenomenology (New York: Fordham University Press, 2001), and the review of this work by Derek J. Morrow in American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 75, no. 4 (Fall 2001): 633–39; Marie-Andrée Ricard, ‘‘La question de la donation chez Jean-Luc Marion,’’ Laval théologique et philosophique 57, no. 1 (2001): 83–94; James K. A. Smith: ‘‘Respect and Donation: A Critique of Marion’s Critique of Husserl,’’ American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 71, no. 4 (Autumn 1997): 523–38; ‘‘Liberating Religion from Theology: Marion and Heidegger on the Possibility of a Phenomenology of Religion,’’ International Journal for Philosophy and Religion 46 (1999): 17–33; and Speech and Theology: Language and the Logic of Incarnation (London: Routledge, 2003), esp. chap. 2; Marlène Zarader, ‘‘Phenomenology and Transcendence,’’ trans. Ralph Hancock et al., in Transcendence in Philosophy and Religion, ed. James E. Faulconer (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2003), pp. 106–19. For a more general treatment of the topic in which the analysis is guided by the later writings of Derrida, see Hent de Vries, Philosophy and the Turn to Religion (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999). 2. John Milbank: ‘‘Can a Gift Be Given? Prolegomena to a Future Trinitarian Metaphysic,’’ Modern Theology 11, no. 1 (Jan. 1995): 119–61, repr. in Rethinking Metaphysics, ed. L. Gregory Jones and Stephen E. Fowl (Oxford: Blackwell, 1995), pp. 119–61; ‘‘Only Theology Overcomes Metaphysics ,’’ New Blackfriars 76 (July–Aug. 1995): 325–43, repr. in Milbank’s The Word Made Strange: Theology, Language, Culture (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997), pp. 36–52; ‘‘The Soul of Reciprocity, Part One: Reciprocity Refused ,’’ Modern Theology 17, no. 3 (July 2001): 335–91; ‘‘The Soul of Reciprocity , Part Two: Reciprocity Granted,’’ Modern Theology 17, no. 4 (Oct. 2001): 485–507; ‘‘Postmodernité,’’ in Dictionnaire critique de théologie, ed. J.Y . Lacoste (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1998; Quadrige, 2002), pp. 924–25. Most recently, Milbank has repeated this criticism in his Being...