現象學開始的目標在於作為一門嚴格的科學而為各門學科奠基，因此開啟了對明證性、本質的要求。但是這個要求在面對「他人」這個議題時遭到嚴重的挑戰，即便意識自身可以保證一個超驗的自我，但它具有怎樣的合法性可以保證他人？胡賽爾曾試圖說明超驗的自我如何將其他自我當作主體際共同體的平等夥伴構造出來。他的推論方式乃透過意向性中具有的「互現」指引出他者作為「變更」的自我:他我。這種認識的開端如同其他事物一樣，來自對身體的感知經驗。接著以「配對」的方式聯繫起來，最後透過「移情共感」保證其可能。雖然這個嘗試並不成功，但那成功的引起「他者」這議題，同時也提供了重要線索—身體。梅洛龐蒂繼承胡賽爾的思路，透過對《觀念II》的解讀，強調透過身體回到知覺的現象場域。他對胡賽爾的路徑做更了為深度的探索，對移情共感亦然。他認為有更原初的基礎，亦即「反身性」，在這概念下開啟了以身體為基礎所建構的相互主體性關係。另一方面，萊維納斯對他者議題也有進一步的推進。他同樣拒絕移情共感建構為對等關係的主體際性世界，強調他者即是一種純粹的陌生性、絕對的在我之外的超越。我與他者的關係來自他者之臉的顯現。臉的概念雖然代表著超越，但仍有其身體的維度。本文所要處理的，即是將兩人放入同樣的討論平台，藉此辨析在處理「他者」議題上各自推進的焦點及其不同之處。

Philosophy as a rigorous science and to found every disciplines is the end of phenomenology. In this perpose, it started with the requirements for evidence and essence. However, this requirement is seriously challenged when it encounter the issue of the "other". Even if consciousness can guarantee a transcendental ego, but how could it have the right to confirm the other? Husserl tried to explain how transcendental ego constructs other ego as equal partners in intersubjective community. His process began with the concept of “appearance” which is the function of consciousness to indicate the other as a "changed" ego: alter ego. This comprehension begin with the perception of the body which as other being. Second step ego and the other linke in a "pairing" manner, and last they are guaranteed through empathy. Although this attempt was not successful, but it made the topic of "other" be notice, meanwhile he left the main clue - the body. Merleau-Ponty inherits the ideas of Husserl, and through the interpretation of Idea II, he focus on the returning to phenomen field of pereception through the experience about body. He followed Husserl's path but more frofound, and so did the concept of empathy. In his opinion there is a more original foundation--reflexiveness, under which he constructed the inter-subjective relationship on the basis of body. On the other hand, Levinas has further promoted the topic of other. He refused the concept of empathize either, and emphasize other as pure strangeness and absolute transcendence. The relationship of I and other come from the appearance of Other's "face". This concept represent transcendence, but also refer to the dimention of body. This essay will put two philosophers on the same plan, and to recognize their different on the topic of ohter and different paths they made.