Ground zero for a post-moral ethics in J. M. Coetzee’s Disgrace and Julia Kristeva’s melancholic

Continental Philosophy Review 45 (1):1-22 (2012)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Perhaps no other novel has received as much attention from moral philosophers as South African writer J. M. Coetzee’s Disgrace . The novel is ethically compelling and yet no moral theory explains its force. Despite clear Kantian moments, neither rationalism nor self-respect can account for the strange ethical task that the protagonist sets for himself. Calling himself the dog man, like the ancient Cynics, this shamelessly cynical protagonist takes his cues for ethics not from humans but from animals. He does not however claim much in the way of empathy or understanding of animals, and his own odd motives remain a puzzle throughout the stages of his ethical transformation. Many scholars approach Coetzee’s text through an ethics of alterity, and even argue that Disgrace is exemplary in this regard. Kristeva’s rendition of alterity ethics brings us close to the novel’s vision, and yet the novel points towards a more primordial basis for ethics in the search for meaning through the human encounter with other animal species
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-11-21
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
The Lives of Animals.Coetzee, J. M.
Primates and Philosophers. How Morality Waal, Frans; Macedo, Stephen; Ober, Josiah; Wright, Robert; Korsgaard, Christine M. & Kitcher, Philip

View all 24 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
294 ( #15,302 of 50,265 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
23 ( #26,008 of 50,265 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.