Alterity and divergence: reflections on interculturality via Levinas and Jullien

The three kinds of differences distinguished in Emmanuel Levinas’ thinking, along with François Jullien’s relevant elaborations, are utilised to distinguish three ways of contemplating interculturality: “distinction” treats different cultures as different parts of a unity, “strangeness” sees the other culture as exotic and heterogeneous, and “alterity” views the other culture as an ethical object that can never be captured by the subject. However, there are significant differences between Levinas and Jullien’s philosophies. The former emphasises the priority of the other over the self, while the latter emphasises reflection of the self through the other. On the one hand, in cross-cultural communication, “the intelligible common,” the ultimate purport of divergence, can balance the asymmetry between the self and the other in Levinas’ thinking. On the other hand, Levinas’ ethics is also a necessary complement to the idea of divergence: according to Levinas, divergence is bound to occur when the self takes on responsibility for the other. The two strands of thought need to be reconciled and practised in real life Only by returning to the simplicity and complexity of life can Levinas and Jullien’s thoughts be activated. Correspondingly, cross-cultural communication based on alterity and divergence should also be expanded from mere cognitive understanding to living practices. A cross-cultural life will not only expand a subject’s freedom and range of possibility but also work as a strategy to resist capitalist globalisation and its consequences of homogenisation and uniformisation.