An ethical ideal can remain inspiring even when impossible to follow

Evidence

As Merleau-Ponty pointed out in his ‘Sartre and Ultrabolshevism’, Sartre himself did not stick to his own principle. Confronted with the gaze of those unfavoured in Stalin’s prisons, he managed for a long time to take no account of their accusing eyes, giving reasons why they could be disregarded. But perhaps the ‘gaze’ idea was never intended to make consistent sense. Just as with Levinas’ or Weil’s ethical philosophies, in which the demands made on us by the gaze of the Other are theoretically infinite in extent, an ideal does not become any less inspiring just because it is impossible to stick to. — Sarah Bakewell, At the Existentialist Café, 860

Categorization

• XREF: Ties Sartre’s gaze to Levinas and Weil’s infinite-Other ethics — a useful synthesis for orienting within the broader existentialist/Continental lineage. — connects to: Ethically clean answers to catastrophe may not exist as formulated. — Theodor W. Adorno, Minima Moralia: Reflections from…, 70; Impossible ideals still demand disciplined effort toward them — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans: Interpreting…, 1864; Genuine inspiration and care cannot be bought without being destroyed — Yanis Varoufakis, Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism, 69
• DEEPTHINKING: The claim that an impossible ethical ideal retains its inspirational power raises the question whether ethics is better as regulative horizon than as action-guide — a genuinely paradigm-adjacent reflection.

Broader Connections

• Impossible ideals still demand disciplined effort toward them #expands (0.90) — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans, 1864