The Idea
The text proposes a human horizon based on turning the other into a self, and the self into an other. The meaning here is not the elimination of differences, but the breaking of rigid relations that make each side see itself as the center and the final point. In this way, mutual recognition becomes a condition for building a broader humanity, not merely a general moral slogan.
Concise Formulation
The human horizon consists in turning the other into a self and the self into an other
Its Place in the Book’s Argument
This claim appears at a structural point in the book because it shifts the discussion from diagnosis to the proposed horizon. After criticizing fundamentalism and closed alignments, this vision emerges as an ethical and epistemic way out. It aligns with the book’s argument, which seeks a form of dialogue that goes beyond self-centeredness and absolute rejection of the other.
Why It Matters
The importance of this claim lies in showing that Arkoun does not stop at critique, but searches for the possibility of a different relationship among human beings. It shows that his understanding of humanity is based on reciprocity in vision rather than domination. It also helps the reader see that the book’s project culminates in rebuilding the relationship with the other.
Brief Evidence
The text calls for a human horizon based on turning the “other” into a self and the self into an other, inspired by Paul Ricoeur. The aim is not to erase differences among people, but to break the rigid relations that make each side see itself as the center and the final point. In this way, mutual recognition becomes a condition for building a broader humanity.
Reading Questions
- What does it mean in practical terms for the other to become a self and the self to become an other?
- Does the text mean complete equality, or a change in the way difference is viewed?
Degree of Documentation
High: the claim appears in a clear place in the book’s material.