Fact of Reason or Fact for Reason? This study argues that not only does Kant’s factum thesis fail to provide an adequate justification of morality, it also constitutes a blind spot insofar as it gestures towards a space beyond the limits of reason. Through a deconstructive reading of the justifying tension, the hypothesis is developed that what resists rational closure is the invaginated trace of a pre-reflective summons of the self by a radically other person, as outlined in Levinas's work. This summons both inspires and destabilises formal principles. This intervention is intended for scholars working at the intersection of law and philosophy, as well as those specialising in Kantian and Levinasian ethics and deconstruction. This title is also available as open access.
