ABSTRACT

This chapter reviews and compares three theorists—Nel Noddings, Emmanuel Levinas, and Michael Slote—and their respective ethical theories developed against the dominant Western approach. While Noddings and Levinas attempt to reconfigure a notion of post-Enlightenment subjectivity in seeking new ethical ground, Slote attempts a virtue theory that does not challenge the fundamental beliefs and assumptions of the Enlightenment tradition. I discuss how these theorists understand the root cause of the problems of the Enlightenment legacy and their respective approaches and justifications in addressing the problems. I conclude that, while a shared interest in and valuing of receptivity is apparent in all theories, they also bear profound differences and exhibit different merits.