Forgiveness

by Vladimir Jankélévitch, Andrew Kelley (Translation)

Philosopher Vladimir Jankélévitch has only recently begun to receive his due from the English-speaking world, thanks in part to discussions of his thought by Jacques Derrida, Emmanuel Lévinas, and Paul Ricoeur. His international readers have long valued his unique, interdisciplinary approach to philosophy’s greatest questions and his highly readable writing style.

Originally published in 1967, Le Pardon, or Forgiveness, is one of Jankélévitch’s most influential works. In it, he characterizes the ultimate ethical act of forgiving as behaving toward the perpetrator as if he or she had never committed the action, rather than merely forgetting or rationalizing it—a controversial notion when considering events as heinous as the Holocaust.

Like so many of Jankélévitch’s works, Forgiveness transcends standard treatments of moral problems, not simply generating a treatise on one subject but incorporating discussions of topics such as free will, giving, creativity, and temporality. Translator Andrew Kelley masterfully captures Jankélévitch’s melodic prose and, in a substantive introduction, reviews his life and intellectual contributions. Forgiveness is an essential part of that legacy, and this indispensable English translation provides key tools for understanding one of the great Western philosophers of the twentieth century.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction

208 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1967

About the author

Vladimir Jankélévitch était un philosophe et musicologue français. Il était le fils de Samuel Jankélévitch, un médecin juif ukrainien qui s'était installé en France après avoir fui les progroms antisémites.

Vladimir Jankélévitch was a French philosopher and musicologist. He was the son of Samuel Jankélévitch, a Ukrainian Jewish doctor who moved to France after fleeing the anti-Semitic pogroms.

Reviews

[Valeriu Gherghel · Rating 2 out of 5]

Iertarea, Le Pardon e un opuscul tipărit în 1967. El nu pare tipic pentru gîndirea lui Jankélévitch, un filosof al nuanțelor și ezitării, în care „Je-ne-sais-quoi” și „Le presque-rien” sînt formulele definitorii.

Ce l-a împins pe filosof să devină dintr-odată tăios, caustic, vehement? Răspunsul e simplu și a fost formulat de Karl Jaspers prin sintagma „culpă germană”: nu doar executorii direcți, ci întregul popor german e vinovat de ceea ce s-a petrecut în timpul războiului. După grozăviile petrecute la Auschwitz, îndemnul evanghelic (Matei 5, 38-44: „iubiţi-vă duşmanii şi rugaţi-vă pentru cei ce vă persecută”) a devenit imposibil de urmat. Din păcate, situația se repetă în zilele noastre.

Cu cîțiva ani înainte de apariția cărții lui Jankélévitch, în Germania, dar și aiurea, avusese loc o înverșunată discuție juridică și morală. Specialiștii s-au întrebat dacă există crime imprescriptibile, în care nu e posibilă amnistia de nici un fel și răspunsul lor final fusese afirmativ. Crimele împotriva umanității nu pot fi prescrise de nimeni. Sau, cu vorbele lui Jankélévitch: „Iertarea a murit în lagărele de exterminare”, Le pardon est mort dans les camps de la mort. Nimeni nu are puterea și dreptul de a ierta ororile naziste.

De obicei, iertarea ia forme inautentice: devine scuză, uitare, uzură a timpului, neglijență. Timpul le rezolvă pe toate (deși timpul nu rezolvă nimic). În acest caz, subiectul care iartă e anonim. În schimb, iertarea autentică e o „formă de sfințenie”, un har. Doar Iisus Christos are acest privilegiu.
În acest caz, iertarea e un ideal, o idee-limită, un termen imposibil de atins. Ea vine dintr-o iubire totală, pură, dintr-un „amour-fou”. Omul obișnuit nu e capabil de asta.

Din păcate, după Auschwitz (unde torționarii au încercat să distrugă însăși esența ființei umane), am descoperit că „iubirea e mai puternică decît răul și răul e mai puternic decît iubirea: l’amour est plus fort que le mal et le mal est plus fort que l’amour”. Acest enunț paradoxal justifică poziția omului care nu mai poate ierta, imprescriptibilul.

[Alec · Rating 5 out of 5]

Vladimir Jankelevitch is one of my new favorite philosophers. This penetrating look at forgiveness employs an apophatic method of approaching the "limit of pure forgiveness," that normative ideal which continuously resists human conceptualizing. Jankelevitch sets up his description of forgiveness so well in the first two thirds of the book by effectively deconstructing contemporary experiences of "forgiveness" such as temporal decay and the excuse. The result is an incredibly clear, well-written, moving, and optimistic view on the "mad and mortal adventure" that is approaching the limit of forgiveness.

[Edzia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wybaczenie jako przedmiot rozważań filozoficznych - niełatwe to i ryzykowne. Jankelevitch się tego podjął w wielkim stylu - rozruszał moje szare komórki

[Larry Hansen · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book presented an analytical view of forgiveness of what it is and what it is not.
Excusing is not forgiving and forgetting as in "time heals all wounds" is not forgiving either. The idea that to understand is to forgive is also not forgiveness and makes forgiveness useless.
Forgiveness is outside of justice, ethics, and even morality. It is spontaneous and must be done freely to be done truly. In a sense, it is one's chance to bestow grace. Anyway, that's some of what I thought he was saying.

It is a slow read and written for academia. There are a lot of powerful ideas and insights but his audience will be small because of his verbose writing style. Lots of foreign words and phrases, not all footnoted. For example, he writes, " Considered from its positive side, it is nothing other than the necessity of the quoddity. The notion of the Imprescriptible, in general,refers us to this diptych of an impossibility and a necessity" These kinds of sentences were sprinkled throughout the book. It could be a very useful and enlightening book for many folks if written, or translated, less esoterically.

[Ardelean Simona · Rating 5 out of 5]

Este cea mai profundă și nuanțată lectură pe tema iertărij de până acum,m-a îmbogățit peste așteptări.
Autorul descrie cu un rafinament aparte procese psihologice și argumentează din ce motive uitarea , scuza ,indulgența, înțelegerea sau mila nu înseamnă IERTARE.

[Andre DeWinne · Rating 4 out of 5]

I had to read this in the original French for a philosophy course at a theological faculty. The French is very demanding, so I struggled with it, and eventually got this English translation which helped a bit getting through the whole book. It is brilliant in its rigorous analysis of what it really means to forgive. The influence of Bergson's thought is very noticeable, and so it has made me want to read more of Bergson. Jankélévitch's central thesis that true forgiveness can only be absolutely unconditional is challenging. This did not fully convince me, because there are often very good reasons for conditions in forgiveness. But it was a useful encounter with the thought of a brilliant mind.

[Gabriela Górska · Rating 5 out of 5]

Mózg mnie boli

[asia · Rating 3 out of 5]

3.5 ⭐️