Levinas`s philosophy is generally regarded as ethics. However, one wonders whether his so-called ``ethical turn`` is meaningful in solving ethical problems in the real world. In this article, I argued that the direction of his ethical discourse based on the notion of the absolute other is not towards the ``secular reality`` but towards the ``ethical ideal``, I suspect that this is the reason why J, Derrida, whose thought is arguably the closest to that of Levinas, analysed Levinas`s theory of the other as ``thought separate from ethics``. In a similar vein, P. Ricoeur asserts that Levinas`s ethics of the other is ``simply an extension of ontology``. Moreover, B. Taurek and R. Rorty claim that ``ethics is impossible`` for Levinas. The root of the problem that caused these critiques can be found in Levinas`s thought system. In particular, his theory of the other, which he proposed as the result of the deconstruction of ``being`` and ``totality``, does not aim to be genuine consideration about the ``general other`` or the ``alienated others``, but merely aims to be theological ethics about the absolute other. This is why his ethics, which is not human-centered but god-centered, takes human ``hostage``.