From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Philosophy Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.
Additional information: Related task forces (core areas): Metaphysics Social and political philosophy

The Other redirects to Subject-object problem. Hyacinth 07:04, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The Other is now an article on the movie. — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:34, May 5, 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Checking 2 Women 3 why no criticisms? 4 Two Calvin Thomases 5 = Copyright Violation 5.1 Vegan advertisement. 5.2 Vegan advertisement.

[edit] Checking

This page was barely coherent, so I've rewritten it. I'm not a philosopher though, so it needs checking. Also, I've added some invisible queries within the text that need answering.The Singing Badger 18:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Women

This is a good introduction but it should be more greatly emphasised that the other is not just women. Otherness also comes out of race, religion and so on. Even beyond this everyone feels other at some point. Even a rich, white man can be made to feel other through social slights. Insertformulaherei love being an other person

I see nothing in the article which indicates that the other is just women. The first example given, in the introduction, is Asians construed as the other by Europeans. Hyacinth 06:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] why no criticisms?

this introduction sucks balls! every other page expresses some sort of criticisms of the thought that is being described, I think that some should be added to this page. mainly from the essay written by Slavoj Zizik titled "Smashing the neighbor's face." Zizek expresses several very interesting, and convincing, arguments against the ethic of the other, most specifically the justifications made by levinas. (Impaler2g19 05:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC))

[edit] Two Calvin Thomases

In the "some other quotations" section, there's a link to Calvin Thomas. The Calvin Thomas listed in the sources is the 21st-century scholar Calvin Thomas (critical theorist), for whom I just created a stub. Is the Ferdinand de Saussure quote something from that Calvin Thomas, writing about de Saussure, or is it something that de Saussure wrote himself, quoting the linguist Calvin Thomas, who was his contemporary? I couldn't tell from the context — the 19th century Calvin Thomas was also a linguist, so de Saussure could have been quoting him, but the 21st century Calvin Thomas is a theorist who has written on the concept of the Other, and he could have quoted de Saussure. If anyone knows which is being referenced here, please ensure that the link points to the right place. Thanks. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 18:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] = Copyright Violation

Hey y'all. This article is one huge copyvio. See here [1]. Eclectek ^{C T} 15:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

It is not the whole article, just three sections. The offending material was added at 03:32, March 16, 2007 by User:74.102.64.140. It has been removed. --Blainster 09:09, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vegan advertisement.

At the end of the "History of the Idea" section, am I the only one who thought the final addition was completely superfluous and unnecessary? It adds nothing to the article itself, or the understanding of the concept, nor is it philosophically or historically important or relevant. It's just a meaningless interjection of vegan propaganda with no real connection to the concept.

The section in question: "The Other manifests in the ethical theory of vegan feminist Carol J. Adams in the form of the absent referent. This refers to a psycho-social detachment between the consumer and the slaughtered animal which occurs when people eat meat."

I'd remove it, but I imagine this discussion panel is here for a reason. - AceRoccola 05:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree whole-heartedly, the sentence in question does not sinc with the work and adds little to it except to provide an example of the concept in use from a particularly radical perspective. The last thing this article needs is to fill itself with a glut of misc. examples as the concept is so pervassive that it has seeped into countless gender and ethnic studies. --70.190.102.19 (talk) 13:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Surely though, since that section describes many 'forms' the Other is given, the Otherisation of the non-human fits alongside the Otherisation of the non-male and non-white/European etc? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.44.64.142 (talk) 04:42, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Vegan advertisement.

No, remove it if you feel it is irrelevant, others will comment on your change if they disagree. The discussion page is for things like major and persisting disagreements. Otherise we dive in and alter if we feel we can justify our case. TonyClarke (talk) (a vegan!) —Preceding comment was added at 12:24, 15 December 2007 (UTC)