• Log In

The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast

A Philosophy Podcast and Philosophy Blog

Subscribe on Android Spotify Google Podcasts audible patreon
  • Home
  • Podcast
    • PEL Network Episodes
    • Publicly Available PEL Episodes
    • Paywalled and Ad-Free Episodes
    • PEL Episodes by Topic
    • Nightcap
    • (sub)Text
    • Pretty Much Pop
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • Phi Fic Podcast
    • Combat & Classics
    • Constellary Tales
  • Blog
  • About
    • PEL FAQ
    • Meet PEL
    • About Pretty Much Pop
    • Nakedly Examined Music
    • Meet Phi Fic
    • Listener Feedback
    • Links
  • Join
    • Become a Citizen
    • Join Our Mailing List
    • Log In
  • Donate
  • Store
    • Episodes
    • Swag
    • Everything Else
    • Cart
    • Checkout
    • My Account
  • Contact
  • Mailing List

What Would an I-Thou Encounter Look Like?

March 5, 2013 by Daniel Horne 8 Comments

A dialogical relation will show itself also in genuine conversation, but it is not composed of this. ...On the other hand, all conversation derives its genuineness only from the consciousness of the element of inclusion—even if this appears only abstractly as an "acknowledgement" of the actual being of the partner in the conversation; but this acknowledgement can be real and effective only when it springs from an experience of inclusion, of the other side.

-Martin Buber, Between Man and Man (London: Routledge, 1947).

One vision of the I-Thou encounter may appear in the often-parodied cult film My Dinner with Andre. For anyone who hasn't seen MDWA, the synopsis is as follows:  two friends get together for dinner, and wind up having a really deep conversation. Much of the beginning of the film consists of the Apollonian Wally listening somewhat skeptically to the strange spiritual experiences recounted by his more Dionysian friend Andre. But it's only when Wally starts to challenge Andre on the deeper significance of his new-age adventures that the conversation becomes compelling. As described in this blog entry from Prof. Azly Rahman:

At the dinner table hence, we saw a meeting of beings, one with a “world consciousness” of the “I-it” and one of “I-Thou” as in Wally and Andre respectively. It is a meeting not merely of two people possessing of (or being possessed by) a varying amount of economic/material capital but of metaphysical/spiritual capital. The movie could also have been titled “The Re-education of Wally and Andre” in that only when there is, as Buber term[ed] the inclusionary aspect of the parallel monologues can genuine dialogue happen. When Wally was probing into what lies in the consciousness of Andre for a great length of the conversation, he is merely excluding himself from the dialogue. Similarly, when Andre was narrating his metaphysical escapades, he is largely excluding himself from the transformative realm. But when Wally started to question the “meaninglessness” to him, of Andre’s “fantastic stories”, a genuine dialogue was about to be established and one which perhaps would have a lasting effect on both characters. Through this thesis–anti-thesis of this stage of the dialogue, we saw a remarkable moment of the meeting of the I with the Thou in the dialogue itself (and not between the interlocutors as persons).

-Daniel Horne

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

Filed Under: Things to Watch, Web Detritus Tagged With: Cinema Studies, dialectic, Martin Buber, philosophy blog

Comments

  1. Lynda OReilly says

    March 6, 2013 at 12:29 pm

    “…the meeting of the I with the Thou in the dialogue itself (and not between the interlocutors as persons).” ~ Prof Rahman

    When toddlers are playing in the same room they do what’s called ‘parallel play’ — casting an eye at each other occasionally but staying in their own territory. We humans do that all the time even when we’re eye to eye and using each other’s names. Listen to conversations around you; listen to your own conversations. We stay in our own safe place and rarely does a question or a challenge really want an insight different than our own. It’s a relief to stop being fearful and solicit truth or the discomfort of a scary possible truth and then to actually consider it without throwing familiar defenses up in front of ourselves. Difficult too, and a human can only stand so many hard truths in a lifetime so examine possible truths carefully, partially even, after you’ve listened carefully to the other.

    Reply
    • dmf says

      March 7, 2013 at 10:04 am

      http://ttbook.org/book/love-20-barbara-frederickson

      Reply
  2. dmf says

    March 6, 2013 at 1:21 pm

    DH, if you get a chance see what you think of: http://www.janushead.org/8-2/lingis.pdf

    Reply
    • Daniel Horne says

      March 6, 2013 at 8:01 pm

      Thanks, dmf, will consider. I can already tell Lingis has a refreshing prose style.

      Reply
      • dmf says

        March 6, 2013 at 9:21 pm

        he’s a gem to but tends to wax Romantic, or as the anthropologists say goes na(t)ive

        Reply
  3. Tammy says

    March 7, 2013 at 9:32 am

    I read an article in Commonweal (a Catholic publication) then read your blog and watched the clip.
    http://commonwealmagazine.org/polarization-church-and-country

    First, I want to say, I really enjoyed the Martin Buber podcast with all the follow-up blogs. The thing about Religious Studies is it’s academic study, which I like, yet, I am Catholic and to write any publication re Catholic theology (a theologian I’m not) one has to stay within the boundaries or one is pretty much in the doghouse.

    That said, it’s hard to address topics that are controversial, yet need to be addressed for any in-depth discussion. The thing is I don’t know if this kind of medium allows for authentic communication. Actually, I think it does or rather can but it’s difficult and different from oratory face-to-face communication. The Clip from My Dinner with Andre picks up on a similar topic re dialectic in Plato’s Gorgias.

    Reply
    • dmf says

      March 7, 2013 at 10:08 am

      Jack Caputo is Catholic tho he is often in the doghouse, but ya know for a people who pay annual homage to a manger that might not be a bad place to be…
      http://books.google.com/books/about/Demythologizing_Heidegger.html?id=r5AHN7sH0h4C

      Reply
  4. Gerry says

    March 7, 2013 at 12:54 pm

    An interesting exploration of the experience of this kind of mutual meeting/openness is “Working at Relational Depth” by the psychologists Dave Mearns and Mick Cooper.

    URL here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Working-Relational-Depth-Counselling-Psychotherapy/dp/0761944583/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Citizenship has its Benefits

Become a PEL Citizen
Become a PEL Citizen, and get access to all paywalled episodes, early and ad-free, including exclusive Part 2's for episodes starting September 2020; our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email and chat more causally; a community of fellow learners, and more.

Rate and Review

Nightcap

Listen to Nightcap
On Nightcap, listen to the guys respond to listener email and chat more casually about their lives, the making of the show, current events and politics, and anything else that happens to come up.

Subscribe to Email Updates

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

Support PEL

Buy stuff through Amazon and send a few shekels our way at no extra cost to you.

Tweets by PartiallyExLife

Recent Comments

  • Evan on Episode 130: Aristotle’s “De Anima”: What Is Life?
  • Erick Mitsak on Episode 130: Aristotle’s “De Anima”: What Is Life?
  • Evan Hadkins on Ep. 296: Heidegger Questions Being (Part Two for Supporters)
  • Tony L on Science, Religion, and Secularism Part XXV: Charles Taylor—The Protestant Reformation and the Rise of the Disciplinary Society
  • Paul D. Van Pelt on PREVIEW-Ep. 295: Kant on Preventing War (Part Three

About The Partially Examined Life

The Partially Examined Life is a philosophy podcast by some guys who were at one point set on doing philosophy for a living but then thought better of it. Each episode, we pick a text and chat about it with some balance between insight and flippancy. You don’t have to know any philosophy, or even to have read the text we’re talking about to (mostly) follow and (hopefully) enjoy the discussion

Become a PEL Citizen!

As a PEL Citizen, you’ll have access to a private social community of philosophers, thinkers, and other partial examiners where you can join or initiate discussion groups dedicated to particular readings, participate in lively forums, arrange online meet-ups for impromptu seminars, and more. PEL Citizens also have free access to podcast transcripts, guided readings, episode guides, PEL music, and other citizen-exclusive material. Click here to join.

Blog Post Categories

  • (sub)Text
  • Aftershow
  • Announcements
  • Audiobook
  • Book Excerpts
  • Citizen Content
  • Citizen Document
  • Citizen News
  • Close Reading
  • Combat and Classics
  • Constellary Tales
  • Exclude from Newsletter
  • Featured Article
  • General Announcements
  • Interview
  • Letter to the Editor
  • Misc. Philosophical Musings
  • Nakedly Examined Music Podcast
  • Nakedly Self-Examined Music
  • NEM Bonus
  • Not School Recording
  • Not School Report
  • Other (i.e. Lesser) Podcasts
  • PEL Music
  • PEL Nightcap
  • PEL's Notes
  • Personal Philosophies
  • Phi Fic Podcast
  • Philosophy vs. Improv
  • Podcast Episode (Citizen)
  • Podcast Episodes
  • Pretty Much Pop
  • Reviewage
  • Song Self-Exam
  • Things to Watch
  • Vintage Episode (Citizen)
  • Web Detritus

Follow:

Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | Apple Podcasts

Copyright © 2009 - 2022 · The Partially Examined Life, LLC. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy · Terms of Use · Copyright Policy

Copyright © 2022 · Magazine Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in