This use of kinesis as movement or disturbance that unsettles by Michael Loriaux helps us to makes sense of Levinas' conception of the encounter with, and responsibility to, others. Responsibility is inherent in the initial encounter between persons ---before language or philosophy or law. The obligation to respond depends upon an openness to discourse, in which some modicum of trust must precede any dialogue whatsoever, and an awareness that something within us and critical to our existence is not ours and not reducible to our interests.

There is a disturbing movement here. Loriaux says:

Levinas traces the source of that kinesis to the encounter with the Other. For Levinas, that encounter is lived as an indictment and a threat to the Self’s ontological construction of the world, a construction in which the Self is deeply invested because it renders its world familiar and compliant. The encounter with the Other challenges the Self either to impose some “totalizing” ontology on the Other in defense of his own ontological construction of the world, or to surrender that world to the intrigue of the encounter through the exploration of the Other’s rival construction. Levinas characterizes the openness to exploration as an openness to the “infinite,” which by its ever-receding horizon contrasts with the closing, or narrowing of the horizon of “totality,” or ontological control.

Loriaux continues:

The movement initiated by the encounter with the Other, whether oriented toward totality or infinity, is always violent. In the first instance, it produces a movement to secure the Self’s ontological world, to achieve “domination” as a “work of ontology,” to apprehend the Other not in its individuality but in its generality. In the second instance, it ends in “eschatological vision,” the apperception of new horizons of possibility. That apperception is no less violent because of its power to wrench the Self from its ontological assurance by calling the Self to an attitude of responsibility toward the Other.