The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Ethical Loneliness: The Injustice of Not Being Heard
Abstract
Ethical loneliness is the experience of being abandoned by humanity, compounded by the cruelty of wrongs not being heard. It is the result of multiple lapses on the part of human beings and political institutions that, in failing to listen well to survivors, deny them redress by negating their testimony and thwarting their claims for justice. Jill Stauffer examines the root causes of ethical loneliness and how those in power revise history to serve their own ends rather than the needs of the abandoned. Out of this discussion, difficult truths about the desire and potential for political forgiveness, transitional justice, and political reconciliation emerge. Moving beyond a singular focus on truth commissions and legal trials, she considers more closely what is lost in the wake of oppression and violence, how selves and worlds are built and demolished, and who is responsible for re-creating lives after they are destroyed. Stauffer boldly argues that rebuilding worlds and just institutions after violence is a broad obligation and that those who care about justice must first confront their own assumptions about autonomy, liberty, and responsibility before an effective response to violence can take place. In building her claims, Stauffer draws on the work of Emmanuel Levinas, Jean Améry, Eve Sedgwick, and Friedrich Nietzsche, as well as concrete cases of justice and injustice across the world.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“For Stauffer, 'ethical loneliness' is a variety of isolation experienced when one suffers persecution and then abandonment.”
From After the Unsilence of the Birds: Remembering Aśvaghoṣa’s Sundarī (2019) · cites this paper as Stauffer 2015
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Items 301–307 of 307
Baron, J. (2026) · Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht eBooks · doi:10.13109/9783666409103.163
van Keuk, E., & Wolf, V. (2026) · Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht eBooks · doi:10.13109/9783666409103.225
Hübinette, T., Iversen, C., & Strand, M. (2026) · Adoption Quarterly · doi:10.1080/10926755.2026.2730137
Cinematic victimology as phenomenology: Memento as Stuck in Time
Pemberton, A. (2026) · Crime Media Culture An International Journal · doi:10.1177/17416590261490495
Listening, as a Theme in Phenomenology
Stauffer, J. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-05936-9_427
Self-citationBetween Trust and Fear: Making Space for Reconciliation
Katila, A. (2026) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009696432.006
Guimarães-Fernandes, F., Chou, D., de Oliveira, L. M., Chenaud, P., Bosoni, N. D. O., Villalobo, A., Medina, D., Miguel, E. C., Benoit, L., Bonini, G., et al. (2026) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-10974007/v1
Metadata
- Authors
- Stauffer, J.
- Corresponding author
- Stauffer, Jill
- Venue
- Columbia University Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Columbia University Press
- Published
- 2015-12-31
- OpenAlex
- W4254331790
- Cited by
- 108
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 8
- FWCI
- 11.04
- Type
- book
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Columbia University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › War, Law, and Justice
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Memory, violence, and history
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Memory, Trauma, and Testimony
- Keywords
- survivors of violence, transitional justice, political reconciliation, political forgiveness, truth commissions, redress, witness testimony, historical revisionism, responsibility, autonomy, freedom, Emmanuel Levinas, Jean Améry, Eve Sedgwick, Friedrich Nietzsche
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.