Any phenomenology that makes the other's constitution depend on the ego's own self-experience systematically forecloses the irreducible surplus that defines the other as other rather than alter ego.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

The Other(Central to Russell's ethic of impersonal self-enlargement): Everything beyond the individual self: other selves, the non-human universe of large impersonal forces (wind, sea, mountains, stars), and potentially the entities of mathematics.
alter ego(Feuerbach's starting point for non-egocentric philosophy): The antithesis or other of the ego; that which stands over against the self as an independent, object-like pole of experience.
constitution(Distinguished from identity — the group is not the same thing as its members, but is constituted by them): A metaphysical relation whereby one entity (a group) is distinct from but materially or compositionally dependent on another entity (its members)
ego(SW VI: 180): A representational complex of which all component parts may be negated, such that none of them seems essential to it

Based on where you are in your exploration