Gratton responds

You can read his response at his blog PHILOSOPHY IN A TIME OF ERROR.

A few quick points in response:

1. Sorry but not surprised to hear that Heidegger Explained was unobtainable by your bookstore in San Diego. All of my Open Court books were sold out at one point this summer, which I suppose is a good sign, though it frightened me. Their priority was to reprint the first two, which is now done as can be seen from the fact that the Amazon prices are now back to normal levels. As for Heidegger Explained, they were “working on having it available again by October 1.” Which is tomorrow, but they may need a bit of extra time.

2. I’m surprised by Gratton’s claim of a Spinoza/Levinas link, because Levinas spends so much time portraying himself as the anti-Spinoza in Totality and Infinity, and I think rightly so.

3. I can’t remember the third point I was going to make. This will be a placeholder point until I can remember what I wanted to say.

Oh, now I remember. Gratton writes:

“Now, some homework for myself will be to reread Graham’s post on how one can be a thinker of the Other and a thinker of substance, given Levinas’s avowed return to the conatus of Spinoza (desire, not a return to some ousia). Or otherwise put, Levinas sides with Plato’s good beyond being, not with Aristotle.”

I don’t see why they’re mutually exclusive. And anyway it’s not a choice between the good beyond being, or substance. Rather, it is the simultaneous fact of the good beyond being, substance, and formless enjoyment of the hither side of being that is the very opposite of a beyond.

Here’s what I’ll do… I’ll send Gratton my page proofs right now. They’re in pretty good shape, with just a few minor typos.