| Mater,
Pater, and Metaphysical Love: A Philosophical
Exploration of Being, Value, and Revolt By Martin Sjardijn 2025 Abstract This article
examines the metaphysical divide between Mater
(mother, matter, body) and Pater (father, logos,
abstraction) in the Western philosophical tradition,
drawing on Aristotle, Julia Kristeva, Luce Irigaray,
and Martin Heidegger. It analyzes how this dichotomy
has shaped the conceptualization of being, value, and
love, and how love, as a semiotic and reciprocal
force, can transcend this opposition2. Through
Kristeva's concepts of the symbolic and the semiotic,
Irigaray's advocacy for feminine transcendence, and
Heidegger's Da-sein, a redefinition of metaphysics is
proposed in which the body and the chaos of Mater are
no longer subordinate but form the foundation of
meaning and transcendence.
1 Introduction: A Millennial Divide The history of
Western thought has constructed a fundamental
separation between the woman as Mater (mother, matter,
body) and the man as Pater (father, logos,
abstraction). This opposition is not merely social or
biological but metaphysical, touching the core of our
understanding of being, value, and love5. While Mater
represents the chaotic, living ground of existence,
Pater embodies the ordering force of meaning6. This
article explores the origins of this divide, its
reproduction in philosophical and economic systems,
and the potential of love as a liberating force, as
proposed by Julia Kristeva and Luce Irigaray, in
dialogue with Martin Heidegger's ontology.
2 The Metaphysical Roots: Why Mater is Subordinated 2.1 Aristotle's Legacy Aristotle laid the foundation for the hierarchical separation between Mater and Pater by reducing the woman to hyle (passive matter) and associating the man with eidos (active form)8. This created a metaphysical hierarchy: ● Mater: corporeality, transience, the "lower" nature. ● Pater: spirit, eternity, "civilization". This dichotomy marginalized the feminine and established a philosophy in which the body was subordinated to the mind. 2.2 Capital as Abstract Transcendence The masculine domains of language, law, and money functioned as an escape from materiality. Money, as metal and abstract value, transformed life into exchange value14. The womb became a commodity, yet its raw reality—birth, blood, death—remained elusive to the capitalist system. Julia Kristeva describes this as the abject real, which disrupts the illusion of control: "Capitalism commodifies everything, but the abject real (bodily fluids, death) is unsellable chaos". 3 Kristeva's Revolt: Love as Semiotic Disruption Julia Kristeva offers an escape from this binary trap through two concepts: 1. The Symbolic: the ordered world of language, law, and paternal authority. 2. The Semiotic: pre-verbal drives such as rhythm, instinct, and the maternal voice. Love, in Kristeva's thought, is not a romantic bridge but a subversive force19. In motherhood, the body breaks through the symbolic order, as in the singing mother who blends language and body. In queer desire or protest art, new meanings emerge. The abject, such as menstruation or death, disrupts the illusion of control and confronts us with the chaos of Mater. 4 Irigaray's Divine Feminine: Beyond the Bridge Luce Irigaray
critiques Western metaphysics for lacking a feminine
transcendence. In Speculum of the Other Woman, she
argues that the woman functions as a mirror for
masculine desires, devoid of her own subjectivity. Her
solution is a "divine feminine" that unites body and
spirit, reimagining love as reciprocal recognition
rather than an instrument of domination.Irigaray
writes: "The woman is not raw material for masculine
transcendence she is transcendence". Her advocacy for
a feminine morphology of meaning emphasizes a plural,
fluid language that breaks with phallocentric logic.
5 Heidegger and Da-sein: The Bodily Ground of Being Martin
Heidegger's concept of Da-sein (being-there) provides
an ontological basis for transcending
the Mater-Pater dichotomy. Da-sein reminds us that all
meaning is rooted in the body.
Mater is not a "lower" layer but the primary
experience of existence. Pater (logos) is a response to this ground, not a
replacement for it. Heidegger's ontology invites a
revaluation of the
bodily as the origin of meaning.
6 Conclusion: Love as Recognition of Chaos The solution to the Mater-Pater dichotomy lies not in reconciliation but in recognizing their unity: 1. Redefining Value: Life (Mater) is the immeasurable ground, not a resource for extraction. 2. Decolonizing Love: Love is not a romantic mask for domination but an exercise in mutual exposure, as in Kristeva's semiotic revolt. 3. Renewing Metaphysics: Irigaray's divine feminine shows that transcendence is not an escape from the body but through the body. True metaphysics, as this article argues, begins where the word bleeds and the body thinks. Love is the courage to embrace this cycle not as a bridge, but as home. Appendix: Summary of Speculum of the Other Woman by Luce Irigaray Luce Irigaray'sSpeculum of the Other Woman (1974) is a groundbreaking philosophical work that radically questions the conceptualization of femininity, language, psychoanalysis, and philosophy in the Western tradition, particularly through critiques of Plato, Freud, and Hegel. Key Ideas 1. The Woman as the 'Other' of Man: Irigaray argues that in Western thought, the woman is not conceived as an autonomous subject but as a derivative or mirror of the man, defined solely in relation to his discourse and desire. 2. The Speculum Metaphor: The "speculum" refers to both a medical instrument for internal examination and a mirror that reflects. Women, in masculine philosophy, serve as a mirror for male self-reflection, denied their own subjectivity or language. 3. Critique of Plato, Freud, and Hegel: ○ Plato: In his cave allegory, Irigaray sees the masculine "Idea" contrasted with the feminine chaos of matter. ○ Freud: She critiques his theory of penis envy and female sexuality as a lack, proposing instead a plural, diffuse feminine sexuality. ○ Hegel: She rejects his master-slave dialectic, where the woman serves as a mere stage in masculine self-becoming. 4. Language and Sexual Difference: Irigaray advocates for a rethinking of language beyond phallocentric logic, proposing a feminine morphology of meaning that is plural, fluid, and diffuse. Style and Method The book is renowned for its poetic, fragmentary, and associative style, employing pastiche, parody, irony, and repetition to subvert masculine discourses from within46. Influence and Significance Speculum is a foundational text in French feminist philosophy, influencing feminist theory, psychoanalysis, literary studies, and queer theory. It is controversial for its complexity, potential essentialism, and the question of whether its proposed feminine language can truly exist outside masculine logic. Conclusion Irigaray's Speculum calls for a reinvention of feminine subjectivity, sexuality, and language, opening space for the unthought and unsaid: the feminine as inexpressible difference. References [1] Aristotle. (n.d.). Generation of Animals. [Translated work]. [2] Marx, K. (1867). Das Kapital. Hamburg: Verlag von Otto Meissner. [3] Kristeva, J. (1982). Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection. New York: Columbia University Press. [4] Kristeva, J. (1974). Revolution in Poetic Language. New York: Columbia University Press. [5] Butler, J. (1990). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York: Routledge. [6] Irigaray, L. (1974). Speculum of the Other Woman. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. [7] Heidegger, M. (1927). Being and Time. [Translated by J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, 1962]. Oxford: Blackwell. |
||
|
|
In this submission, the author
Martin Sjardijn presents a bold philosophical
exploration that challenges
entrenched dichotomies in Western thought. By
drawing from a range of thinkers
such as Aristotle, Julia Kristeva, Luce Irigaray,
and Martin Heidegger, the
paper seeks to redefine traditional metaphysical
narratives. The central
thesis—that love can serve as the vehicle to
transcend the long-standing
Mater-Pater divide—promises to contribute to
contemporary philosophical
discourse on gender, ontology, and value. Overview The manuscript investigates
the historical metaphysical division between 'Mater'
and 'Pater,' exploring how
this binary influences perceptions of being, value,
and love. Through the works
of Kristeva and Irigaray, the author proposes love
as a semiotic and reciprocal
force capable of bridging these divides. Central to
this exploration is the
proposition that the chaotic and corporeal 'Mater'
articulates the foundation
of meaning, which, when embraced, offers a more
inclusive understanding of
metaphysics. By incorporating Heidegger’s concept of
Da-sein, the author aims
to reframe bodily existence as central to
ontological inquiry. Relevant
References Including a clear literature
review helps reviewers quickly see what's new and
why it matters, which can
speed up the review and improve acceptance chances.
The following references
were selected because they relate closely to the
topics and ideas in your
submission. They may provide helpful context,
illustrate similar methods, or
point to recent developments that can strengthen how
your work is positioned
within the existing literature.
Strengths The manuscript exhibits a
robust engagement with significant philosophical
texts, providing a fresh
perspective on the implications of metaphysical
dualisms rooted in gender. The
use of Kristeva and Irigaray as central figures
offers an innovative lens,
embracing feminist critiques to challenge classical
philosophical paradigms.
The interdisciplinary nature of the work—spanning
philosophy, feminism, and
ontology—lends it considerable depth. The
re-evaluation of love as a
transformative cultural and metaphysical force is
both intriguing and
ambitious, promising new conversations in the field. Major
Comments Methodology The author’s methodological
approach blends textual analysis with philosophical
reinterpretation, which
successfully navigates complex themes. However, the
analysis could be
strengthened by clarifying the methodological
criteria for selecting specific
thinkers and theories. Additionally, exploring
counterarguments from
contemporary philosophers might enrich the discourse
and address potential
criticisms. Framing and
Clarity While the manuscript presents
compelling arguments, some sections—particularly
those addressing technical
philosophical concepts—may benefit from clearer
definitions and contextual
explanations. For instance, more explicit
definitions of ‘symbolic’ and
‘semiotic’ as employed by Kristeva would enhance
accessibility for readers not
versed in her work. Theoretical
Integration The integration of Heidegger’s
ontology with the critique of traditional
metaphysics is a bold synthesis but
requires clearer articulation. Further elucidation
on how Heidegger’s Da-sein
specifically reconfigures the Mater-Pater dichotomy
within a feminist framework
would diversify the theoretical dialogue. Minor
Comments Figures
and Diagrams Consider the inclusion of
diagrams that map the proposed metaphysical
relationships among Mater, Pater,
and love. Visual aids could assist in
conceptualizing complex ideas and enhance
reader comprehension. Terminology
and Language The manuscript’s style
occasionally drifts towards neologisms and complex
syntax. Simplifying language
while maintaining intellectual rigor would broaden
its appeal across diverse
audiences. Reviewer
Commentary This work resonates with
interdisciplinary potential, bridging gaps between
feminist theory, classical
philosophy, and modern ontological inquiries. It
presents an opportunity to
provoke thought and discussion around the evolving
interpretations of
metaphysical love and gender dichotomies. The
challenge lies in persuading a
traditionally rigid discipline to embrace such
transformative ideas, which
might necessitate addressing the paper's perceived
complexities in
communication. Summary Assessment Overall, the submission offers
a thought-provoking contribution that expands the
philosophical landscape
concerning metaphysical dualities and the notion of
love. By challenging
entrenched gender binaries with a fresh interpretive
framework, it engages with
ongoing scholarly conversations about identity,
ontology, and value. Its
success will depend on its ability to communicate
complex ideas clearly and its
responsiveness to potential theoretical critiques
from traditionalist
perspectives. In final reflection, this
manuscript provides fertile ground for intellectual
expansion and debate on
long-standing issues within metaphysical and
feminist philosophy. Its ambition
to position love as a harmonizing force between
chaotic and ordered
understandings of being is both commendable and
challenging, warranting it a
thorough and open-minded engagement from the
academic community. |
|