The Role of the Other in the Construction of Identity: Considerations Around Martin Buber and Emmanuel Levinas

By comparing Buber and Levinas, this article aims to clarify the constitution of the self as a place of identity. Both authors recognise, at first, that the self is only defined in relation to others and, ultimately, in relation to the You. However, the definition of that relationship is opposite in both authors. Levinas’ interpretation echoes Luther and Kierkegaard, as it establishes an insurmountable difference between you and me. Buber, although he borrows many concepts from the Danish philosopher, fundamentally, the definition of the individual as a relationship, contradicts Kierkegaard by defining the relationship not as a simple ‘facing’, but as a third party between me and you. Finally, it is concluded that although the individual must be preserved in the I–You relationship, this cannot be understood as something in itself, as a third part, and, on the other hand, there must be a certain knowledge about the Thou for the relationship to be real.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Religions
Published
2026-04-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/rel17040486
Primary Topic
Philosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Role of the Other in the Construction of Identity: Considerations Around Martin Buber and Emmanuel Levinas

Teresa Aizpún Bobadilla
Religions
Philosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism
article

The Role of the Other in the Construction of Identity: Considerations Around Martin Buber and Emmanuel Levinas

Teresa Aizpún Bobadilla
article en

Abstract

By comparing Buber and Levinas, this article aims to clarify the constitution of the self as a place of identity. Both authors recognise, at first, that the self is only defined in relation to others and, ultimately, in relation to the You. However, the definition of that relationship is opposite in both authors. Levinas’ interpretation echoes Luther and Kierkegaard, as it establishes an insurmountable difference between you and me. Buber, although he borrows many concepts from the Danish philosopher, fundamentally, the definition of the individual as a relationship, contradicts Kierkegaard by defining the relationship not as a simple ‘facing’, but as a third party between me and you. Finally, it is concluded that although the individual must be preserved in the I–You relationship, this cannot be understood as something in itself, as a third part, and, on the other hand, there must be a certain knowledge about the Thou for the relationship to be real.

ReligionsVol. 17(4)
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos (ES)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Philosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.