The anticipation of the typical under the assumption of the non-occurrence of the atypical is the experiential schema governing the individuation of ordinary enduring objects and their properties. Against this background, a primitive form of “if-and-only-if” consciousness is implicit in our everyday perceptual intentions. The thematization of the fact that perception operates under this proto-tentative structure occurs at the level of reflection and is expressed by defeasible judgments of the form “if p, then q, unless r,” or “if p, then (...) q provided that not-r”. Here I will argue that what is made thematic by judgments containing such restrictive clauses is the structure of unpredictability inherent in what Husserl calls the horizon of latency and, indirectly, the world as background of normality. (shrink)

The topic of the present reflection is Christian religious belief. Specifically, we will use Husserlian tools in order to examine the positional nature of this particular type of belief. We will be less interested in the question concerning the success conditions of this experience and more in its noetic structure. According to our proposal, to believe by faith supposes (although it is not exhausted by) accepting the existence of mundane evidence speaking against this fundamental belief. The believer acknowledges the existence (...) of this contradicting en-doxical basis and nevertheless believes what she believes. We will refer to this simultaneous movement of accepting and cancelling as the concessive structure of the religious attitude. The para-doxical movement of experiencing conflicting evidence as being subjectively ineffective is a key component of this attitude. At least some inchoative conflict with the world is required in order for the religious belief to be religious. Lastly, we will try to show that, with a distinctive terminology, the idea that the Christian religious attitude involves a conflict between subjectivity and world is present not only in Kierkegaard but also in phenomenological figures like Scheler and even Husserl. (shrink)

Normality, for Husserl, is said in many ways. While the most detailed treatments of this technical Husserlian concept are usually found in discussions concerning the constitutive dimension of the lived body and intersubjectivity, little attention has been paid to the notion of normality understood as the tacit regularity of nature. Indeed, the normal can also be understood as the causal background which is presupposed, tentatively, in the anticipation of uniform processes of change, as well as in poieticinstrumental experiences, that is, (...) in experiences involving the production and use of objects. The subject that elaborates, manipulates or uses objects is installed in nature. Hence, in our productive-instrumental confrontation with objects in the world, we operate under the assumption that the potentially mutable causal scene surrounding our acting life will retain its style. This assumption of normality is the world, in one of the many ways in which Husserl characterizes this concept. The world qua background of normality becomes thematic, retrospectively, precisely when it ceases to cooperate with the agent’s initiatives. This, on my view, is what lies behind Husserl’s assertion that the world is a “super-object” or “higher-level theme”. (shrink)

El presente trabajo aborda el problema de la justificación de la normatividad de los imperativos instrumentales. Husserl critica la pretensión kantiana de justificar la fuerza normativa de este tipo de requerimientos de racionalidad con recurso a un mero análisis semántico de lo que significa querer un fin. La constitución genética de la noción de medio y, derivadamente, de los imperativos instrumentales supondría, por el contrario, la cooperación de actos lógicos y afectivos, y sólo a partir de su convergencia se volvería (...) comprensible la estructura funcional de la razón volitiva, en cuanto facultad referible a intenciones prácticas con pretendida eficacia causal. The paper addresses the problem of the justification of the normativity of instrumental imperatives. Husserl criticizes the Kantian attempt to justify the normative force of this type of rationality requirements through a mere semantic analysis of what willing an end means. The genetic constitution of the concept of means and, derivatively, of instrumental imperatives, would, on the contrary, involve the cooperation of logical and emotional acts. Thus, the paper argues that the functional structure of volitional reason becomes intelligible only on the basis of the convergence of those two elements, insofar as it is a faculty that can be referred to practical intentions with alleged causal eficacy. (shrink)

El presente trabajo aborda el problema de la justificación de la normatividad de los imperativos instrumentales. Husserl critica la pretensión kantiana de justificar la fuerza normativa de este tipo de requerimientos de racionalidad con recurso a un mero análisis semántico de lo que significa querer un fin. La constitución genética de la noción de medio y, derivadamente, de los imperativos instrumentales supondría, por el contrario, la cooperación de actos lógicos y afectivos, y sólo a partir de su convergencia se volvería (...) comprensible la estructura funcional de la razón volitiva, en cuanto facultad referible a intenciones prácticas con pretendida eficacia causal. (shrink)