Ethics Preceding Method: A Levinasian Critique of Research Practice

Historically, academic research has been structured around the supremacy of methodology. Neutrality, replicability, and objectivity are generally regarded as the fundamental principles of scholarly legitimacy, whereas ethics is considered a secondary issue, typically managed through institutional review processes or compliance mechanisms. This order suggests that research can be planned, carried out, and defended mostly through strict methods, with ethical reflection added later as a form of regulation. Nevertheless, this configuration jeopardises the reduction of ethics to mere procedure and participants to mere subjects of examination. This article critiques the method-first paradigm through Emmanuel Levinas’s philosophy, especially his assertion that ethics constitutes “first philosophy.” Levinas posits that responsibility to the Other precedes ontology, cognition, and categorisation. The face of the Other presents the researcher with an inescapable demand that cannot be mitigated by objectivity or methodological detachment. From this perspective, the traditional subject–object relationship central to research practice is undermined: participants are not mere data to be handled but individuals whose distinctiveness by necessity demands accountability. Consequently, ethics cannot be perceived merely as a procedural adjunct to methodology; rather, it constitutes the foundational basis from which scholarly inquiry must emerge. Methodologically, the article integrates a critical conceptual analysis of Levinas’s writings with a normative critique of current research practices. This method allows the argument to transition from mere scholarly commentary to a prescriptive assertion: research should be reconceptualised as an ethical engagement rooted in accountability for the Other, rather than as a dispassionate process of knowledge creation. The conclusion suggests that an ethics-first approach, defined by humility, attentiveness, and responsiveness, provides a foundational reorientation of scholarship. In this recontextualization, ethics is not an external limitation but the foundational condition of academic inquiry itself.