Other (philosophy)

In phenomenology, the terms the Other and the Constitutive Other

identify the "other" human being, in their differences from the Self, as
being a cumulative, constituting factor in the self-image of a person;
as acknowledgement of being real; hence, the Other is dissimilar to
and the opposite of the Self, of Us, and of the Same.[1][2] The
Constitutive Other is the relation between the personality (essential
nature) and the person (body) of a human being; the relation of
essential and superficial characteristics of personal identity that
corresponds to the relationship between opposite, but correlative,
characteristics of the Self, because the difference is inner-difference,
within the Self.[3][4]

The condition and quality of Otherness (the characteristics of the

Other) is the state of being different from and alien to the social
identity of a person and to the identity of the Self.[5] In the discourse
of philosophy, the term Otherness identifies and refers to the
characteristics of Who? and What? of the Other, which are distinct
and separate from the Symbolic order of things; from the Real (the The founder of phenomenology,
authentic and unchangeable); from the æsthetic (art, beauty, taste); Edmund Husserl, identified the Other
from political philosophy; from social norms and social identity; and as one of the conceptual bases of
from the Self. Therefore, the condition of Otherness is a person's non- intersubjectivity, of the relations
conformity to and with the social norms of society; and Otherness is among people.
the condition of disenfranchisement (political exclusion), effected
either by the State or by the social institutions (e.g., the professions)
invested with the corresponding socio-political power. Therefore, the imposition of Otherness alienates the
person labelled as "the Other" from the centre of society, and places him or her at the margins of society, for
being the Other.[6]

The term Othering describes the reductive action of labelling and defining a person as a subaltern native, as
someone who belongs to the socially subordinate category of the Other. The practice of Othering excludes
persons who do not fit the norm of the social group, which is a version of the Self;[7] likewise, in human
geography, the practice of othering persons means to exclude and displace them from the social group to the
margins of society, where mainstream social norms do not apply to them, for being the Other.[8]

Contents
Background
Philosophy
Psychology
Ethics
Critical theory
Imperialism and colonialism
Racism
Orientalism
 The subaltern native
Gender and sex
LGBT identities
Woman as identity
Knowledge
Cultural representations
The Academy
Practical perspectives
See also
Books
Sexual difference
References
Sources
Further reading
External links

Background

Philosophy

The concept of the Self requires the existence of the constitutive Other as
the counterpart entity required for defining the Self; in the late 18th century,
Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831) introduced the concept of the
Other as a constituent part of self-consciousness (preoccupation with the
Self),[9] which complements the propositions about self-awareness (capacity
for introspection) proffered by Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762–1814).[10]

Edmund Husserl (1859–1938) applied the concept of the Other as the basis
for intersubjectivity, the psychological relations among people. In Cartesian
Meditations: An Introduction to Phenomenology (1931), Husserl said that the
Other is constituted as an alter ego, as an other self. As such, the Other person
posed and was an epistemological problem—of being only a perception of the The idealist philosopher G.
consciousness of the Self.[1] W. F. Hegel introduced the
concept of the Other as
In Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology (1943), constituent part of human
Jean-Paul Sartre (1905–1980) applied the dialectic of intersubjectivity to preoccupation with the Self.
describe how the world is altered by the appearance of the Other, of how the
world then appears to be oriented to the Other person, and not to the Self. The
Other appears as a psychological phenomenon in the course of a person's life, and not as a radical threat to the
existence of the Self. In that mode, in The Second Sex (1949), Simone de Beauvoir (1908–1986) applied the
concept of Otherness to Hegel's dialectic of the "Lord and Bondsman" (Herrschaft und Knechtschaft, 1807)
and found it to be like the dialectic of the Man–Woman relationship, thus a true explanation for society's
treatment and mistreatment of women.

Psychology
The psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan (1901–1981) and the philosopher of ethics Emmanuel Levinas (1906–1995)
established the contemporary definitions, usages, and applications of the constitutive Other, as the radical
counterpart of the Self. Lacan associated the Other with language and with the symbolic order of things.
Levinas associated the Other with the ethical metaphysics of scripture and tradition; the ethical proposition is
that the Other is superior and prior to the Self.

In the event, Levinas re-formulated the face-to-face encounter (wherein a person is morally responsible to the
Other person) to include the propositions of Jacques Derrida (1930–2004) about the impossibility of the Other
(person) being an entirely metaphysical pure-presence. That the Other could be an entity of pure Otherness (of
alterity) personified in a representation created and depicted with language that identifies, describes, and
classifies. The conceptual re-formulation of the nature of the Other also included Levinas's analysis of the
distinction between "the saying and the said"; nonetheless, the nature of the Other retained the priority of
ethics over metaphysics.

In the psychology of the mind (e.g. R. D. Laing), the Other identifies and refers to the unconscious mind, to
silence, to insanity, and to language ("to what is referred and to what is unsaid").[11] Nonetheless, in such
psychologic and analytic usages, there might arise a tendency to relativism if the Other person (as a being of
pure, abstract alterity) leads to ignoring the commonality of truth. Likewise, problems arise from unethical
usages of the terms The Other, Otherness, and Othering to reinforce ontological divisions of reality: of being,
of becoming, and of existence.[1]

Ethics

In Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority (1961), Emmanuel Lévinas

said that previous philosophy had reduced the constitutive Other to an object
of consciousness, by not preserving its absolute alterity — the innate
condition of otherness, by which the Other radically transcends the Self and
the totality of the human network, into which the Other is being placed. As a
challenge to self-assurance, the existence of the Other is a matter of ethics,
because the ethical priority of the Other equals the primacy of ethics over
ontology in real life.[12]

From that perspective, Lévinas described the nature of the Other as "insomnia
and wakefulness"; an ecstasy (an exteriority) towards the Other that forever
remains beyond any attempt at fully capturing the Other, whose Otherness is
infinite; even in the murder of an Other, the Otherness of the person remains
uncontrolled and not negated. The infinity of the Other allowed Lévinas to The philosopher of ethics
derive other aspects of philosophy and science as secondary to that ethic; thus: Emmanuel Lévinas said that
the infinite demand the
Other places on the Self
The others that obsess me in the Other do not affect me as makes ethics the foundation
examples of the same genus united with my neighbor, by of human existence and
resemblance or common nature, individuations of the human philosophy.
race, or chips off the old block. . . . The others concern me from
the first. Here, fraternity precedes the commonness of a genus.
My relationship with the Other as neighbor gives meaning to my
relations with all the others. — Otherwise than Being, or Beyond
Essence[13]:232

Critical theory
Jacques Derrida said that the absolute alterity of the Other is compromised, because the Other person is other
than the Self and the group. The logic of alterity (otherness) is especially negative in the realm of human
geography, wherein the native Other is denied ethical priority as a person with the right to participate in the
geopolitical discourse with an empire who decides the colonial fate of the homeland of the Other. In that vein,
the language of Otherness used in Oriental Studies perpetuates the cultural perspective of the dominantor–
dominated relation, which is characteristic of hegemony; likewise, the sociologic misrepresentation of the
feminine as the sexual Other to man reasserts male privilege as the primary voice in social discourse between
women and men.[1]

In The Colonial Present: Afghanistan, Palestine and Iraq (2004), the geographer Derek Gregory said that the
U.S. government's ideologic answers to questions about reasons for the terrorist attacks against the U.S. (i.e.
11 September 2001) reinforced the imperial purpose of the negative representations of the Middle-Eastern
Other; especially when President G. W. Bush (2001–2009) rhetorically asked: "Why do they hate us?" as
political prelude to the War on Terror (2001).[14] Bush's rhetorical interrogation of armed resistance to empire,
by the non–Western Other, produced an Us-and-Them mentality in American relations with the non-white
peoples of the Middle East; hence, as foreign policy, the War on Terror is fought for control of imaginary
geographies, which originated from the fetishised cultural representations of the Other invented by Orientalists;
the cultural critic Edward Saïd said that:

To build a conceptual framework around a notion of Us-versus-Them is, in effect, to pretend that
the principal consideration is epistemological and natural—our civilization is known and
accepted, theirs is different and strange—whereas, in fact, the framework separating us from them
is belligerent, constructed, and situational.

— The Colonial Present: Afghanistan, Palestine and Iraq (2004), p. 24.[15]

Imperialism and colonialism

The contemporary, post-colonial world system of nation-states (with interdependent politics and economies)
was preceded by the European imperial system of economic and settler colonies in which "the creation and
maintenance of an unequal economic, cultural, and territorial relationship, usually between states, and often in
the form of an empire, [was] based on domination and subordination."[16] In the imperialist world system,
political and economic affairs were fragmented, and the discrete empires "provided for most of their own
needs ... [and disseminated] their influence solely through conquest [empire] or the threat of conquest
[hegemony]."[17]

Racism

The racialist perspective of the Western world during the 18th and 19th centuries was invented with the
Othering of non-white peoples, which also was supported with the fabrications of scientific racism, such as the
pseudo-science of phrenology, which claimed that, in relation to a white-man's head, the head-size of the non-
European Other indicated inferior intelligence; e.g. the apartheid-era cultural representations of coloured
people in South Africa (1948–94).[18]

Consequent to the Holocaust (1941–1945), with documents such as The Race Question (1950) and the
Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1963), the United Nations officially
declared that racial differences are insignificant to anthropological likeness among human beings. Despite the
UN's factual dismissal of racialism, in the U.S., institutional Othering continues in government forms that ask a
citizen to identify and place him or herself into a racial category;[18] thus,
institutional Othering produces the cultural misrepresentation of political
refugees as illegal immigrants (from overseas) and of immigrants as
illegal aliens (usually from México).

Orientalism

To the European peoples, imperialism (military conquest of non-white

peoples, annexation, and economic integration of their countries to the
motherland) was intellectually justified by (among other reasons)
orientalism, the study and fetishization of the Eastern world as "primitive
peoples" requiring modernisation by way of the civilising mission.
Colonial empires were justified and realised with essentialist and
reductive representations (of people, places, and cultures) in books and
pictures and fashion, which conflated different cultures and peoples into
the binary relation of The Orient and The Occident. Orientalism created
the artificial existence of the Western Self and the non–western Other.[19]
Orientalists rationalised the cultural artifice of a difference of essence, A manifestation of the Other in
between white and non-white peoples, in order to fetishize (identify, the form of scientific racism: In
classify, subordinate) the peoples and cultures of Asia into "the Oriental this 1857 illustration from his
Other" — who exists in opposition to the Western Self.[20] As a function work Indigenous Races of the
of imperial ideology, Orientalism fetishizes people and things in three Earth, anthropologist Josiah C.
actions of cultural imperialism: (i) Homogenization (all Oriental peoples Nott justified anti-Black racism by
are one folk); (ii) Feminization (the Oriental always is subordinate in the claiming that the features of
African-Americans had more in
East–West relation); and (iii) Essentialization (a people possess universal
common with chimpanzees than
characteristics); thus established by Othering, the empire's cultural
humans in comparison to white
hegemony reduces to inferiority the people, places, and things of the
people.
Eastern world, as measured against the West, the standard of superior
civilisation.[20][21]

The subaltern native

Colonial stability requires the cultural subordination of the non-white Other for transformation into the
subaltern native; a colonised people who facilitate the exploitation of their labour, of their lands, and of the
natural resources of their country. The practise of Othering justifies the physical domination and cultural
subordination of the native people by degrading them — first from being a national-citizen to being a colonial-
subject — and then by displacing them to the periphery of the colony, and of geopolitical enterprise that is
imperialism.[22]

Using the false dichotomy of "colonial strength" (imperial power) against "native weakness" (military, social,
and economic), the coloniser invents the non-white Other in an artificial dominator-dominated relationship that
can be resolved only through racialist noblesse oblige, the "moral responsibility" that psychologically allows
the colonialist Self to believe that imperialism is a civilising mission to educate, convert, and then culturally
assimilate the Other into the empire — thus transforming the "civilised" Other into the Self.[23]

In establishing a colony, Othering a non-white people allowed the colonisers to physically subdue and
"civilise" the natives to establish the hierarchies of domination (political and social) required for exploiting the
subordinated natives and their country.[24] As a function of empire, a settler colony is an economic means for
profitably disposing of two demographic groups: (i) the colonists (surplus population of the motherland) and
(ii) the colonised (the subaltern native to be exploited) who antagonistically define and represent the Other as
separate and apart from the colonial Self.[25][26]
Othering establishes unequal relationships of power between the
colonised natives and the colonisers, who believe themselves
essentially superior to the natives whom they othered into racial
inferiority, as the non-white Other.[27] That dehumanisation maintains
the false binary-relations of social class, caste, and race, of sex and
gender, and of nation and religion.[24] The profitable functioning of a
colony (economic or settler) requires continual protection of the
cultural demarcations that are basic to the unequal socio-economic
relation between the "civilised man" (the colonist) and the "savage
man", thus the transformation of the Other into the colonial
subaltern.[27][28]

Gender and sex

LGBT identities
The subaltern native is a colonial
The social exclusion function of Othering a person or a social group identity for the Other, which
from mainstream society to the social margins — for being essentially conceptually derives from the
different from the societal norm (the plural Self) — is a socio- Cultural hegemony work of Antonio
economic function of gender. In a society wherein man–woman Gramsci, an Italian Marxist
heterosexuality is the sexual norm, the Other refers to and identifies intellectual.
lesbians (women who love women) and gays (men who love men) as
people of same-sex orientation whom society has othered as "sexually
deviant" from the norms of binary-gender heterosexuality.[29] In practise, sexual Othering is realised by
applying the negative denotations and connotations of the terms that describe lesbian and gay, bisexual and
transgender people, in order to diminish their personal social status and political power, and so displace their
LGBT communities to the legal margin of society. To neutralise such cultural Othering, LGBT communities
queer a city, by creating social spaces that use the spatial and temporal plans of the city to allow the LGBT
communities free expression of their social identities, e.g. a boystown, a gay-pride parade, etc.; as such,
queering urban spaces is a political means for the non-binary sexual Other to establish themselves as citizens
integral to the reality (cultural and socio-economic) of their city's body politic.[30]

Woman as identity

The philosopher of feminism, Cheshire Calhoun identified the female Other as the female-half of the binary-
gender relation that is the Man and Woman relation. The deconstruction of the word Woman (the subordinate
party in the Man and Woman relation) produced a conceptual reconstruction of the female Other as the
Woman who exists independently of male definition, as rationalised by patriarchy. That the female Other is a
self-aware Woman who is autonomous and independent of the patriarchy's formal subordination of the female
sex with the institutional limitations of social convention, tradition, and customary law; the social subordination
of women is communicated (denoted and connoted) in the sexist usages of the word Woman.[31]

In 1949, the philosopher of existentialism, Simone de Beauvoir applied Hegel's conception of "the Other" (as
a constituent part of Self-awareness) to describe a male-dominated culture that represents Woman as the sexual
Other to Man. In a patriarchal culture, the Man–Woman relation is society's normative binary-gender relation,
wherein the sexual Other is a social minority with the least socio-political agency, usually the women of the
community, because patriarchal semantics established that "a man represents both the positive and the neutral,
as indicated by the common use of [the word] Man to designate human beings in general; whereas [the word]
Woman represents only the negative, defined by limiting criteria, without reciprocity" from the first sex, from
Man.[32]
In 1957, Betty Friedan reported that a woman's social identity is formally
established, by the sexual politics of the Ordinate–Subordinate nature of the
Man–Woman sexual relation, the social norm in the patriarchal West. When
queried about their post-graduate lives, the majority of women interviewed at
a university-class reunion, used binary gender language, and referred to and
identified themselves by their social roles (wife, mother, lover) in the private
sphere of life; and did not identify themselves by their own achievements (job,
career, business) in the public sphere of life. Unawares, the women had acted
conventionally, and automatically identified and referred to themselves as the
social Other to men.

Although the nature of the social Other is influenced by the society's social
constructs (social class, sex, gender), as a human organisation, society holds
the socio-political power to formally change the social relation between the The philosopher of
male-defined Self and Woman, the sexual Other, who is not male.[33] existentialism Simone de
Beauvoir developed the
In feminist definition, women are the Other to men (but not the Other concept of The Other to
proposed by Hegel) and are not existentially defined by masculine demands; explain the workings of the
and also are the social Other who unknowingly accepts social subjugation as Man–Woman binary gender
part of subjectivity,[34] because the gender identity of woman is relation, as a critical base of
constitutionally different from the gender identity of man. The harm of the Dominator–Dominated
Othering is in the asymmetric nature of unequal roles in sexual and gender relation, which characterises
relations; the inequality arises from the social mechanics of sexual inequality between
men and women.
intersubjectivity.[35]

Knowledge

Cultural representations

About the production of knowledge of the Other who is not the Self, the philosopher Michel Foucault said that
Othering is the creation and maintenance of imaginary “knowledge of the Other” — which comprises cultural
representations in service to socio-political power and the establishment of hierarchies of domination. That
cultural representations of the Other (as a metaphor, as a metonym, and as an anthropomorphism) are
manifestations of the xenophobia inherent to the European historiographies that defined and labelled non–
European peoples as the Other who is not the European Self. Supported by the reductive discourses (academic
and commercial, geopolitical and military) of the empire's dominant ideology, the colonialist
misrepresentations of the Other explain the Eastern world to the Western world as a binary relation of native
weakness against colonial strength.[36]

In the 19th-century historiographies of the Orient as a cultural region, the Orientalists studied only what they
said was the high culture (languages and literatures, arts and philologies) of the Middle East, but did not study
that geographic space as a place inhabited by different nations and societies.[37] About that Western version of
the Orient, Edward Saïd said that:

the Orient that appears in Orientalism, then,

is a system of representations framed by a
whole set of forces that brought the Orient
into Western learning, Western
consciousness, and later, Western empire. If
this definition of Orientalism seems more
 political than not, that is simply because I
think Orientalism was, itself, a product of
certain political forces and activities.

Orientalism is a school of interpretation

whose material happens to be the Orient, its
civilisations, peoples, and localities. Its
objective discoveries – the work of
innumerable devoted scholars who edited
texts and translated them, codified
grammars, wrote dictionaries, reconstructed
dead epochs, produced positivistically
verifiable learning – are and always have
been conditioned by the fact that its truths,
like any truths delivered by language, are
embodied in language, and, what is the truth
of language?, Nietzsche once said, but a
mobile army of metaphors, metonyms, and
anthropomorphisms – in short, a sum of A cultural representation of the non-white Other:
human relations, which have been The Yellow Terror in all His Glory (1899) depicts a
enhanced, transposed, and embellished Chinese man running with a gun in hand and
poetically and rhetorically, and which, after clenching a knife between his teeth besides a dead
long use, seem firm, canonical, and white woman he has killed. The cartoon was part
obligatory to a people: truths are illusions of the Yellow Peril, a concept emerging around the
about which one has forgotten that this is second half of the 19th century that Chinese
what they are. immigration was a threat to the Western world

— Orientalism (1978) pp. 202–

203.[38]:202

In so far as The Orient occurred in the existential awareness of the Western world, as a term, The Orient later
accrued many meanings and associations, denotations and connotations that did not refer to the real peoples,
cultures, and geography of the Eastern world, but to Oriental Studies, the academic field about The Orient as a
word.[39]

The Academy

In the Eastern world, the field of Occidentalism, the investigation programme and academic curriculum of and
about the essence of The West — Europe as a culturally homogenous place — did not exist as a counterpart to
Orientalism.[40] In the postmodern era, the Orientalist practices of historical negationism, the writing of
distorted histories about the places and peoples of "The East", continues in contemporary journalism; e.g. in
the Third World, political parties practice Othering with fabricated facts about threat-reports and non-existent
threats (political, social, military) that are meant to politically delegitimise opponent political parties composed
of people from the social and ethnic groups designated as the Other in that society.[41]

The Othering of a person or of a social group — by means of an ideal ethnocentricity (the ethnic group of the
Self) that evaluates and assigns negative, cultural meaning to the ethnic Other — is realised through
cartography;[42]:179 hence, the maps of Western cartographers emphasised and bolstered artificial
representations of the national-identities, the natural resources, and the cultures of the native inhabitants, as
culturally inferior to the West.
Historically, Western cartography often featured distortions (proportionate,
proximate, and commercial) of places and true distances by placing the
cartographer's homeland in the centre of the mapamundi; these ideas were
often utilized to support imperialistic expansion. In contemporary cartography,
the polar-perspective maps of the northern hemisphere, drawn by U.S.
cartographers, also frequentlly feature distorted spatial relations (distance, size,
mass) of and between the U.S. and Russia which according to historian
Jerome D. Fellman emphasise the perceived inferiority (military, cultural,
geopolitical) of the Russian Other.[42]:10

Practical perspectives

In Key Concepts in Political Geography (2009), Alison Mountz proposed

concrete definitions of the Other as a philosophic concept and as a term within
phenomenology; as a noun, the Other identifies and refers to a person and to a In "Cosmographia" (1570),
group of persons; as a verb, the Other identifies and refers to a category and a by Sebastian Münster,
label for persons and things. "Europa regina" is the
cartographic centre of the
Post-colonial scholarship demonstrated that, in pursuit of empire, "the world.
colonizing powers narrated an 'Other' whom they set out to save, dominate,
control, [and] civilize . . . [in order to] extract resources
through colonization" of the country whose people the
colonial power designated as the Other.[29] As facilitated
by Orientalist representations of the non–Western Other,
colonization — the economic exploitation of a people
and their land – is misrepresented as a civilizing mission
launched for the material, cultural, and spiritual benefit of
the colonized peoples.[29]

Counter to the post-colonial perspective of the Other as

part of a Dominator–Dominated binary relationship,
Orientalist art: The Reception of the Ambassadors
postmodern philosophy presents the Other and Otherness
in Damascus (1511) features wildlife (the deer in
as phenomenological and ontological progress for Man the foreground) that is not native to Syria.
and Society. Public knowledge of the social identity of
peoples classified as "Outsiders" is de facto
acknowledgement of their being real, thus they are part of the body politic, especially in the cities. As such,
"the post-modern city is a geographical celebration of difference that moves sites once conceived of as
'marginal' to the [social] centre of discussion and analysis" of the human relations between the Outsiders and
the Establishment.[29]

See also
Allophilia
Allosemitism
Alterity
Anatta, Buddhist concept
Caste system in India
Exoticism
Markedness
Neo-Confucianism
 Otherness of childhood
Social alienation
Taoism
Xenocentrism

Books
Orientalism (1978), by Edward Saïd
The Wretched of the Earth, (1961), by Frantz Fanon
The Other (2006), by Ryszard Kapuściński

Sexual difference
Judith Butler
Julia Kristeva
Luce Irigaray
Sarojini Sahoo

References
1. The Oxford Companion to Philosophy (1995) p. 637.
2. "The Other", The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought, Third Edition, (1999) p. 620.
3. Hegel, G. W. F.; Miller, A. V. (1977). Hoffmeister, J. (ed.). Force and the Understanding:
Appearance and the Supersensible World: Phenomenology of Spirit (5th ed.). New York:
Oxford University Press. pp. 98–9. "The relation of essential nature to outward manifestation in
pure change ... to infinity ... as inner difference ... [is within] its own Self."
4. Findlay, J. N.; Hegel, G. W. F.; Miller, A. V. (1977). Hoffmeister, J. (ed.). Analysis of the Text:
Phenomenology of Spirit (5 ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 517–18.
5. Miller, J. (2008). "Otherness" (http://www.sage-ereference.com/view/research/n304.xml). The
SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative
research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. pp. 588–591.
doi:10.4135/9781412963909.n304 (https://doi.org/10.4135%2F9781412963909.n304).
ISBN 9781412941631. Retrieved 27 January 2015.
6. "Otherness", The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought, Third Edition (1999), p. 620.
7. "Othering", The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought, Third Edition (1999), p. 620.
8. Mountz, Allison. "The Other". Key Concepts in Human Geography: 328.
9. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (1967) Vol. 1, p. 76.
10. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (1967) Vol. 8, p. 186.
11. The New Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought (1999 )p. 620.
12. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (1967) p. 637.
13. Lévinas, E., Otherwise than Being, or Beyond Essence (Berlin / Heidelberg: Springer
Science+Business Media, 1974), p. 232 (https://books.google.com/books?id=3eLdBgAAQBAJ
&pg=PT232).
14. The Colonial Present: Afghanistan, Palestine and Iraq (2004), p. 21.
15. Gregory, Derek. The Colonial Present: Afghanistan, Palestine and Iraq (2004), p. 24.
16. Johnston, R.J., et al., The Dictionary of Human Geography, 4th Edition Malden: Blackwell
Publishing, 2000. p. 375.
17. Gelvin, James L. The Modern Middle East: A History, 2nd ed. Oxford; New York: Oxford
University Press, 2008. pp. 39–40.
18. Mountz, Alison (2009). "The Other". Key Concepts in Political Geography: 332.
19. Orientalism, The Penguin Dictionary of Literary Terms and Literary Theory Third Edition (1991),
Ja.A. Cuddon, Ed., pp. 660–661.
20. Mountz, Alison (27 January 2016). "The Other". Key Concepts in Political Geography.
21. Said, Edward (1978). Orientalism. New York: Patheon Books.
22. Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G., & Tiffin, H., Post-Colonial Studies: The Key Concepts (London and
New York: Routledge, 1998), p. 142 (https://books.google.com/books?id=jCSCAgAAQBAJ&lpg
=PP1&pg=PA142).
23. Rieder, John. Colonialism and the Emergence of Science Fiction (2008) pp. 76–77.
24. Mountz, A. (n.d.). The Other. Key Concepts in Political Geography, pp. 328–338. Retrieved 2
February 2016.
25. "WikiWash" (http://wikiwash.metronews.ca/other/703349669-703223196).
wikiwash.metronews.ca.
26. Said, Edward (1993). Culture and Imperialism. New York: Vintage Books (Random House).
p. xii.
27. "Colonialism", Dictionary of Human Geography, pp. 94–98. Retrieved 2 February 2016.
28. Said, Edward (1993). Culture and Imperialism. New York: Vintage Books (Random House).
p. xii.
29. Gallagher, Carolyn, Dahlman, Carl T., Gilmartin, Mary, Mountz, Alison, Shirlow, Peter. Key
Concepts in Political Geography. SAGE Publications Ltd, 2009.
30. Mountz, Allison. "The Other". Key Concepts in Human Geography: 335.
31. McCann, p. 339.
32. McCann, p. 33.
33. Haslanger
34. "Sense & Sensuality" (http://sarojinisahoo.blogspot.com). sarojinisahoo.blogspot.com.
35. Jemmer, Patrick. "The O(the)r (O)the(r)", Engage Newcastle, Vol. 1, August 2010 (ISSN 2045-
0567 (https://www.worldcat.org/search?fq=x0:jrnl&q=n2:2045-0567); ISBN 978-1-907926-00-
6), Newcastle UK: NewPhilSoc Publishing, p. 7 (https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id
=YlN_kz8th4cC&oi=fnd&pg=PA7).
36. Rieder, John. Colonialism and the Emergence of Science Fiction (2008) p. 76.
37. Rieder, John. Colonialism and the Emergence of Science Fiction (2008) p. 71.
38. Saïd, Edward W. Orientalism, 25th Anniversary Ed. New York: Pantheon Books, 1978.
39. Saïd, Edward W. Orientalism (1978) pp. 202–203.
40. Humphreys, Steven R. "The Historiography of the Modern Middle East: Transforming a Field of
Study", Middle East Historiographies: Narrating the Twentieth Century, Israel Gershoni, Amy
Singer, Y. Hakam Erdem, Eds. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2006. pp. 19–21.
41. Sehgal, Meera. "Manufacturing a Feminized Siege Mentality." Journal of Contemporary
Ethnography 36 (2) (2007): p. 173.
42. Fellmann, Jerome D., et al. Human Geography: Landscapes of Human Activities, 10th Ed. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.

Sources
Thomas, Calvin, ed. (2000). "Introduction: Identification, Appropriation, Proliferation", Straight
with a Twist: Queer Theory and the Subject of Heterosexuality. University of Illinois Press.
ISBN 0-252-06813-0.
 Cahoone, Lawrence (1996). From Modernism to Postmodernism: An Anthology. Cambridge,
Mass.: Blackwell.
Colwill, Elizabeth. (2005). Reader—Wmnst 590: Feminist Thought. KB Books.
Haslanger, Sally. Feminism and Metaphysics: Unmasking Hidden Ontologies (https://www.mit.
edu/~shaslang/papers/fmnews/UHO.html). 28 November 2005.
McCann, Carole. Kim, Seung-Kyung. (2003). Feminist Theory Reader: Local and Global
Perspectives. Routledge. New York, NY.
Rimbaud, Arthur (1966). "Letter to Georges Izambard", Complete Works and Selected Letters.
Trans. Wallace Fowlie. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Nietzsche, Friedrich (1974). The Gay Science. Trans. Walter Kaufmann. New York: Vintage.
Saussure, Ferdinand de (1986). Course in General Linguistics. Eds. Charles Bally and Albert
Sechehaye. Trans. Roy Harris. La Salle, Ill.: Open Court.
Lacan, Jacques (1977). Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: Norton.
Althusser, Louis (1973). Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. Trans. Ben Brewster. New
York: Monthly Review Press.
Warner, Michael (1990). "Homo-Narcissism; or, Heterosexuality", Engendering Men, p. 191.
Eds. Boone and Cadden, London UK: Routledge.
Tuttle, Howard (1996). The Crowd is Untruth, Peter Lang Publishing, ISBN 0-8204-2866-3.

Further reading
Levinas, Emmanuel (1974). Autrement qu'être ou au-delà de l'essence. (Otherwise than Being
or Beyond Essence).
Levinas, Emmanuel (1972). Humanism de l'autre homme. Fata Morgana.
Lacan, Jacques (1966). Ecrits. London: Tavistock, 1977.
Lacan, Jacques (1964). The Four Fondamental Concepts of Psycho-analysis. London: Hogarth
Press, 1977.
Foucault, Michel (1990). The History of Sexuality vol. 1: An Introduction. Trans. Robert Hurley.
New York: Vintage.
Derrida, Jacques (1973). Speech and Phenomena and Other Essays on Husserl's Theory of
Signs. Trans. David B. Allison. Evanston: Ill.: Northwestern University Press.
Kristeva, Julia (1982). Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection. Trans. Leon S. Roudiez. New
York: Columbia University Press.
Butler, Judith (1990). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York:
Routledge.
Butler, Judith (1993). Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of "Sex". New York:
Routledge.
Zuckermann, Ghil'ad (2006), "'Etymythological Othering' and the Power of 'Lexical Engineering'
in Judaism, Islam and Christianity. A Socio-Philo(sopho)logical Perspective", Explorations in
the Sociology of Language and Religion, edited by Tope Omoniyi and Joshua A. Fishman,
Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 237–258.

External links
The Centre for Studies in Otherness (http://otherness.dk)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Other_(philosophy)&oldid=1024583192"

This page was last edited on 23 May 2021, at 01:02 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this
site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.