Husserl: Metaphysics and Epistemology

This essay clarifies Edmund Husserl's view of “pure” concepts, with a view to its contemporary metaphilosophical significance. It is argued that Husserl's conception of pure concepts is unique in that he allows overlap between pure and empirical concepts. This overlap leads to a potential for confusion between pure and empirical concepts which I label “amphiboly,” following Kant's use of the term. The essay begins by clarifying Husserl's view of the divergence in concept formation between empirical and pure concepts, and then (...) articulates the specific properties of pure concepts that allow an empirical overlap. These properties include the modality and range of the extension of the concepts, the ordering of objects under the concept, and the mental faculty required to identify an object under the concept. Once we see the source of amphiboly in Husserl's view, it can be observed that many concepts of interest to philosophy, even outside phenomenology proper, are potentially subject to amphibolous uses. Thus, Husserl's view can be a general hermeneutical resource for clarifying the nature of philosophical concepts. (shrink)

Husserl famously argues that it is essential to perception to present the perceived object in perspectives. Hence, there is no—and there cannot be—perception without perspectival givenness. Yet, it seems that there are counterexamples to this essentialist claim, for we seem to be able to imagine beings that do not perceive in perspectives. Recently, there have been some accounts in the literature that critically discuss those counterexamples and assess to what extent they succeed in challenging Husserl’s essentialist claim. In this paper (...) I discuss three different answers to these counterexamples, all of them are found wanting. I offer a novel solution, taking into account some crucial findings of the contemporary debate about imagination and modality. I argue that this new solution is capable of fully vindicating Husserl’s essentialist claim. Finally, I reconstruct Husserl’s own way to treat such counterexamples, in order to showcase the notion of modality Husserlian phenomenology relies on. I argue for the hitherto widely underappreciated point that Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology cannot appeal to strictly absolute modality but that the kind of modality in Husserlian phenomenology is conditional on the facticity that we have the transcendental structure we do in fact have. (shrink)

Four philosophers, Husserl, Wittgenstein, Dennett, and Hegel, who hold for the most part radically different philosophies, all agree on rejecting the notion of atomic entities, of “things-in-themselves,” and insist that objects only make sense – can only be what they are -- in a context.

This investigation constitutes an attempt towards (1) understanding issues and problems relating to the notions of one, many, part and whole in Parmenides and Plato; (2) extracting conditions for a successful account of multiplicity and parthood; (3) surveying Deleuzian conceptions and uses of these notions; (4) appraising the extent to which Deleuze’s metaphysics can answer some of these ancient problems concerning the status of multiplicity and the nature of mereological composition, that is, of the relations that pertain between parts and (...) the wholes that they compose. (shrink)

This article is primarily concerned with the articulation of a defensible position on the relevance of phenomenological analysis with the current epistemological edifice as this latter has evolved since the rupture with the classical scientific paradigm pointing to the Newtonian-Leibnizian tradition which took place around the beginning of 20th century. My approach is generally based on the reduction of the objects-contents of natural sciences, abstracted in the form of ideal objectivities in the corresponding logical-mathematical theories, to the content of meaning-acts (...) ultimately referring to a specific being-within-the-world experience. This is a position that finds itself in line with Husserl’s gradual departure from the psychologistic interpretations of his earlier works on the philosophy of logic and mathematics and culminates in a properly meant phenomenological foundation of natural sciences in his last major published work, namely the Crisis of European Sciences and the Transcendental Phenomenology. Further this article tries to set up a context of discourse in which to found both physical and formal objects in parallel terms as essentially temporal-noematic objects to the extent that they may be considered as invariants of the constitutional modes of a temporal consciousness. (shrink)

The main objective of this work is to achieve an understanding of Husserl's phenomenology as philosophical foundation for theology. It sustains, in the first place, that theology and philosophy do more than converge. It deepens, in second place, in the connection between phenomenology and theology, as well as in the Husserlian conception of God as entelechy and ἐνέργεια. This study concludes with a reflection, in third place, on the possibility of elaborating a theology from the phenomenological inspiration. The thesis that (...) is defended is that phenomenology means for theology, literally, an authentic Herausforderung, that is to say, a provocation that from outside interpellates a discourse, the theological one, that many judged already exhausted and at risk of extinction. In the conclusions are detailed the main contributions that the phenomenology makes to theology. El principal objetivo de este trabajo es lograr una comprensión de la la fenomenología de Husserl como fundamento filosófico para la teología. Sostiene, en primer lugar, la idea de que la teología y la filosofía hacen algo más que converger. Profundiza, en segundo lugar, en la conexión entre fenomenología y teología, así como en la concepción husserliana de Dios como entelequia y ἐνέργεια. Este estudio concluye con una reflexión, en tercer lugar, sobre la posibilidad de elaborar una teología de inspiración fenomenológica. La tesis que se defiende es que la fenomenología supone para la teología, literalmente, una auténtica Herausforderung, es decir, una provocación que desde fuera interpela a un discurso, el teológico, que muchos juzgaban ya agotado y en riesgo de extinción. En las conclusiones se detallan las principales aportaciones que la fenomenología hace a la teología. (shrink)

This chapter reconstructs the account of the organization of unified definite manifolds that Husserl developed in his early logic of parts and wholes. I argue that Husserl’s conception of necessity gets fixed through the logic of fitness that is operative in his account of unified definite manifolds that are organized by symmetrical part/whole relations. Husserl’s logical account of necessity finds its ultimate justification in his theory of intentionality and is operative in his phenomenological methodology generally. Through this conception of necessity (...) of the way in which manifolds are unified and organized, Husserl radicalized and exploded the Kantian conception of the material a priori and distinguished among several kinds of a priori, e.g., the correlational a priori, a priori bound to the empirical, and pure material a priori. Husserl’s phenomenological account of the material a priori further clarifies the important differences with Kant’s approach to the problem of necessity. (shrink)

In recent debates about the nature of non-conceptual content, the Kantian account of intuition in the first Critique has been seen as a sort of founding doctrine for both conceptualist and non-conceptualist positions. In this paper, I begin by examining recent representative versions of the Kantian conceptualist (John McDowell) and Kantian non-conceptualist (Robert Hanna) positions, and suggest that the way the debate is commonly construed by those on both sides misses a much broader and more important conception of non-conceptual content, (...) one for which resources can be found in Husserl’s later thought. Husserl’s account of the object as “transcendental clue” [Transzendentaler Leitfaden] in the context of his later genetic phenomenology suggests a less reductive account of non-conceptual aspects of experience that respects central insights of Kant’s transcendental idealism but does not reduce the role of the non-conceptual to a mere formally-determined, not-yet-conceptualized “fodder.”. (shrink)

The aim of this investigation is to discuss the concept of realism and idealism applied to Husserlian phenomenology, distinguishing the ontological and the epistemological dimensions. Therefore, I propose questions that will help to mark this distinction. The answers will be given with reference to Husserl's texts and commentators.

The main theme of this Thesis is the mind-body problem in Descartes and Husserl. Firstly, the author of this work is dealing with problem through the prism of his own approach. Thus, instead one mind-body problem, the author of this work claims that there are two: the first is ontological (mind-brain relation), while the second is the conceptual one (‘mind’ and ‘body’ as concepts). In Descartes’ Meditations, the ontological level of the problem is explicit, when the conceptual level is implicit. (...) Otherwise, in Husserl’s Crisis and Ideas I, the conceptual level (as the opposition between transcendental phenomenology and natural sciences) of the problem is explicit, while the ontological level is implicit. Though, in his Ideas II (and partially in Crisis), Husserl as it seems mostly deals with ontological level of the problem: the phenomenological ‘solution’ to the ontological mind-body problem can be seen through the description of the body-as-lived (der Leib) as opposed to body-as-physical (der Körper). Secondly, the author of this work is dealing with the question of method where also proposes to interpret Descartes and Husserl’s essences as functions (understood in neither teleological nor causal, but in a neutral way), which could help us overcome ‘crises’ (including the conceptual ‘mind-body’ problem). In the last Chapter of this Thesis, the author looks at the interconnections between Husserlian phenomenology and the contemporary analytic philosophy of mind and tries to clarify the zombie argument and the hard problem of consciousness as presented by the Australian philosopher David Chalmers, from the phenomenological (Husserlian) perspective. (shrink)

This book presents a comprehensive summary and analysis of the development of Husserl's criticism of relativism as it appears in both published works and unpublished manuscripts. The author discerns three stages in the evolution of Husserl's position: an early emphasis on the formal contradictions implicit in various versions of relativism; a subsequent more positive phenomenology of evidence and truth; and a final effort to reconcile the ideal of absolute truth with the limits entailed by the plurality and relativity of lifeworlds. (...) She makes a strong case for the merits of Husserl's later position, and also makes telling criticisms of extreme interpretations of Husserl either as an unrepentant absolutist or as a failed foundationalist. In addition, she engages throughout in an instructive dialogue with contemporary proponents of relativism. (shrink)

It is said that transcendental phenomenology faces an unavoidable aporia, according to which it is perfectly justified to accept the claim that the transcendental ego constitutes the sense of all external being, including other subjects, as well as the claim that other subjects constitute the sense of all external objects, since they are a community of transcendental egos. The essence of the aporia is that it is impossible to accept both of these claims if one accepts the conceptual schema of (...) transcendental phenomenology. In the article, I present an interpretation of transcendental phenomenology which allows one to avoid such consequences. Firstly, the static theory of intersubjectivity presented in Ideas of Pure Phenomenology and Carthesian Meditations is reconstructed and analyzed. Attention is devoted to the issues of phenomenological reduction and constitution of sense. Afterwards, it is argued that one should distinguish two kinds of constitutive processes: one understood as an activity of the sole transcendental ego (self), and the second one as an activity of the community of transcendental egos. It is claimed that both processes are mutually connected. Moreover, it seems that the second kind of constitution is metaphysically prior then the former one. This claim will allow one to overcome solipsistic interpretations of transcendental phenomenology and to overcome the aporia presented. (shrink)

In this paper I present and discuss Husserl’s concept of material a priori truth, particularly with respect to color-concepts, and show that Schlick’s criticism of Husserl’s notion is based on misunderstandings and misconceptions.

Husserl claims that his phenomenological–epistemological system amounts to a “universal” form of empiricism. The present paper shows that this universal moment of Husserl’s empiricism is why his empiricism qualifies as a rationalism. What is empiricist about Husserl’s phenomenological–epistemological system is that he takes experiences to be an autonomous source of immediate justification. On top of that, Husserl takes experiences to be the ultimate source of justification. For Husserl, every justified belief ultimately depends epistemically on the subject’s experiences. These are paradigms (...) of empiricist claims and thus Husserl seems to subscribe to empiricism. However, what is universal about Husserl’s “empiricism” is that he does not limit the concept of experiences to sensory experiences or sensory experiences plus introspective intuitions but broadens the concept of experience such that also a priori intuitions are included. Husserl insists that logical, mathematical, and phenomenological intuitions such as ~, 2 + 2 = 4, and “Experiences necessarily bear the mark of intentionality” provide non-inferential justification analogous to how sensory experiences can non-inferentially justify beliefs such as “There is a table in front of me.” Importantly, Husserl makes clear that such a priori intuitions are not about our concepts but about reality. This is why Husserl’s universal empiricism is a rationalism. Husserl differs from traditional rationalism as he allows that a priori intuitions can be fallible and empirically underminable. This distinguishes Husserl’s rationalism from Descartes’ and makes him a proponent of moderate rationalism as currently championed by Laurence BonJour. (shrink)

Este artículo tiene como finalidad exponer la interpretación del joven Zubiri de la filosofía de Husserl expuesta en su Memoria de Licenciatura (Lovaina) y en su Tesis de Doctorado (Madrid). La comprensión de este primer proyecto filosófico resulta esencial para entender el pensamiento maduro del filósofo español. Al mismo tiempo, nuestro estudio intenta determinar la pertenencia de Zubiri al movimiento fenomenológico. Por último, definimos esta primera filosofía zubiriana como una filosofía de la objetividad pura o dicho de manera más breve; (...) un objetivismo. This paper aims to expose the young Zubiri's interpretation of philosophy of Husserl. Zubiri exhibits this interpretation in his undergraduate Thesis (Leuven) and his PhD Thesis (Madrid). The understanding of this first philosophical project is essential to understand the mature thinking of the Spanish philosopher. At the same time, our study attempts to determine Zubiri's membership in the phenomenological movement. Finally, we define this Zubiri’s early philosophy as a philosophy of pure objectivity or said more briefly; an objectivism. -/- . (shrink)

The standpoint from which my criticisms of empiricist philosophy are made is phenomenological, in the sense given to that word by Husserl. But it is much closer to Sartre and Merleau-Ponty than to the master. In particular, reflexive analysis in my terms concerns experience of things in the world and does not put in parenthesis the question of their existence or reality. The thesis of the world, or in Hume's terms, the natural belief in the independent existence of the world, (...) is in my view primordial, unthinking, unreasoned, and inseparable from our being embodied subjects. The form in which I expound phenomenological doctrines is determined by the arguments of the empiricist philosophers by which I have taken for discussion. It i s a critique of empiricism and not of phenomenology. (shrink)

The influence of Franz Brentano in twentieth century philosophy has been extensive. His two most famous and outstanding pupils were Alexius Meinong and Edmund Husserl. These two are closely related not only regarding their common background in the school of Brentano, but also in their common concern with problems arising from British empiricism. Such a problem is to be found in the nominalist views of Locke, Berkeley, and Hume and their concomitant theories of general ideas. While Meinong's early work continues (...) in the empiricist tradition by characterizing general ideas in terms of abstraction and not in terms of general objects as their correlates, Husserl's _Logical Investigations_ are committed to the claim that general ideas can be described only as ideas which refer to general objects. In _Meinong and Husserl onion and Universals_ the epistemological, psychological, and ontological aspects of these theories are examined and compared. Included is also a translation of _Abstraction and Comparing_ by Meinong. (shrink)

In the article, Husserl’s phenomenology is presented a position being in between absolutism and relativism. According to absolutism, absolute truth is possible as a correlate of the adequacy of cognition. However, from the perspective of relativism, cognition is inadequate and, thus, absolute truth is unavailable. Husserl goes beyond the alternative of absolutism and relativism, maintaining the notion of an absolute truth as a regulative idea. Avoiding absolutism, phenomenology does not change into relativism because it treats the adequacy of cognition as (...) a regulative idea which also leads to retaining the truth as an idea as such. In phenomenology, the truth must be understood in the perspective of the adequacy of obviousness and because such adequacy in cognition does not really happen, both the truth and adequacy shall be regarded as regulative ideas. (shrink)

The article presents two conceptions of "a priori" cognition, i.e. that of Kant and Husserl. Kant’s and Husserl’s positions differ as to the basis of importance of "a priori". Kant conducts subjectivisation of "a priori" because, in his opinion, a priori criteria, such as generalization and necessity, have their basis in the recognising object, and, at the same time, express a subjective inability to present them in other way. Husserl, on the other hand, ontologises "a priori", saying that aprioriness is (...) grounded in the essence, and, as such, expresses an objective deriving from the essence’s inability to be in a different way. However, a consequence of a phenomenological ontologization of "a priori" is a discovery of a material "a priori". The aritcle shows that it is possible to see an analogy between Kant’s and Husserl’s standpoints in terms of the scope of aprioriness. Kant’s subjectivisation of "a priori", though, does not imply a total formalization of what is a priori because Kant is a creator of an idea of an un-clear synthetic "a priori", where one can find similarities to Husserl’s material "a priori". (shrink)

Husserl and Frege on the analysis of the concept of number and primitive logical concepts.

L’objectif poursuivi dans cette étude est de mettre en avant un empirisme «de style husserlien» et d’en indiquer les avantages sur l’empirisme ordinaire. D’abord, partant d’une définition classique due à Chisholm et Sellars, l’auteur énumère les principales thèses de l’empirisme au sens ordinaire et en discute quelques difficultés intrinsèques à la lumière des critiques de Chisholm, Sellars, Goodman et d’autres. Il tente ensuite de montrer que, par son «principe des principes», Husserl a proposé une forme originale d’empirisme, plausiblement moins problématique (...) que ses variantes classiques. L’argument est que l’empirisme de style husserlien échappe aux difficultés énumérées par sa double dimension réflexive et normative. (shrink)

This paper demonstrates that Edmund Husserl’s frequently overlooked 1890 manuscript, “On the Logic of Signs,” when closely investigated, reveals itself to be the hermeneutical touchstone for his seminal 1891 Philosophy of Arithmetic. As the former comprises Husserl’s earliest attempt to account for all of the different kinds of signitive experience, his conclusions there can be directly applied to the latter, which is focused on one particular type of sign; namely, number signs. Husserl’s 1890 descriptions of motivating and replacing signs will (...) be respectively employed to clarify his 1891 understanding of the authentic and inauthentic presentations of numbers via number signs. Moreover, his schematic classification of replacement-signs in Semiotic will illuminate the reasons why he believed the number system to be necessary for the operation of replacing number signs. (shrink)

Neo-Kantianism is common conceived as a philosophy ‘from above’, excelling in speculative constructions – as opposed to the attitude of patient description which is exemplified by the phenomenological turn ‘to the things themselves’. When we study the work of Emil Lask in its relation to that of Husserl and the phenomenologists, however, and when we examine the influences moving in both directions, then we discover that this idea of a radical opposition is misconceived. Lask himself was influenced especially by Husserl’s (...) Logical Investigations, and Husserl, especially in his later writings, was in some respects closer to Kant than were the Neo-Kantians. The contrast between the two philosophers can be illustrated by looking at their view of the objects of judgment; for Lask, as for Kant, judgment can relate to the thing as such only in an indirect way. The world of judgment is a collection of ‘imitations holding a secondary position’. It is cut apart from the plain world of real things by what Lask calls a ‘chasm of artificiality and imagery’. For Husserl, in contrast, the object of judgment is a ‘Sachverhalt’ or state of affairs, something ontologically ‘positive’ in the sense that it is an entity in its own right and does not point beyond itself in the manner of a mere sign or proxy for something else. (shrink)

Husserl beruft sich immer wieder programmatisch auf Platon als den Gründervater der europäischen Philosophie, arbeitet jedoch die Bezüge der Phänomenologie zum Platonismus nie auf - obwohl er die "historische Rückbesinnung" auf die Urstiftung seines Denkens als wesentlichen Bestandteil der "Selbstbesinnung auf ein Selbstverständnis dessen hin, worauf man eigentlich hinaus will, als der man ist, als historisches Wesen" charakterisiert. Die vorliegende Arbeit will diese Reflexion leisten. Ihr Gegenstand ist mithin die Transformation Platonischer Gedanken in Husserls Phänomenologie. Dabei werden sechs Problemgebiete thematisiert: (...) A) Philosophie als Wissenschaft, B) Philosophie als Ethik, C) Philosophie als Polemik, D) Philosophie und das Ende der Lebenswelt, E) Philosophie und das Eigenrecht des Eidetischen, F) Philosophie und das Absolute. Den Abschnitten folgen jeweils kritische Erwägungen zu den Spannungen, die vor dem Platonischen Hintergrund innerhalb der Phänomenologie sichtbar werden. Die Arbeit zeigt, dass die Phänomenologie tatsächlich als eine eigenwillige Endstiftung des Platonismus betrachtet werden kann, wodurch sich eine neue Perspektive auf ihre programmatische und systematische Grundkonfiguration ergibt. (shrink)

This paper aims to discuss some aspects of the Marty–Husserl debate about grammar. My suggestion is that the debate is first of all an epistemological debate, that is, a debate about what a priori knowledge is and how it is acquired. The key opposition is between Marty’s Brentanian notion of ‘analytic intuition’ and Husserl’s Bolzanian notion of ideation. As I will argue, the underlying issue is the possibility of a psychological a priori. On the one hand, analytic intuition provides the (...) psychologist with a priori knowledge about empirical facts. On the other hand, ideation provides the logician with entities that are disconnected from empirical facts—entities which are ‘purely logical’. I conclude with some brief remarks on the Brentanian background of both conceptions. (shrink)

Consciousness is central to what we study in psychology and how we study it. This paper provides a description of the fundamental features and processes of consciousness. Based on Husserl's phenomenology, it begins with a description of Husserl's two most foundational, phenomenological claims: that we 'see' conscious acts, and that we 'see' that we 'see' them. Upon this footing, I explore two forms of skepticism, and I demonstrate their inherent problems. With skepticism described, I explicate an ontology of consciousness. First, (...) I provide a "presentational" model of consciousness that depicts the relation between conscious acts and the objects of consciousness. Second, I explain the importance of "Evidenz." Third, I provide a description of the ubiquitous nature of essences and their importance for a model of consciousness. Fourth, I briefly explain Husserl's account of transcendence. And finally, I describe intentionality and provide a clarification of the nature and function of ideas. 2012 APA, all rights reserved). (shrink)

This essay argues against David Carr’s relativism by clarifying the in principle requirements appropriate to non-relative truths and showing that de facto differences of conceptual frameworks threaten none of them. Non-relative truths are not threatened by history. This defense of non-relative truth belongs to a larger defense of Husserlian “science” that shows how essences, even those “delivered” by history, have a universal “governance” and can be affirmed in nonrelative truths-as such science requires. If history also allows the other qualities of (...) Husserlian science to obtain, then, the essay concludes, such science can exist even as a “situated science.”. (shrink)

This paper argues that Husserl’s method is partially motivated by an attempt to avoid certain absurdities inherent in Hume’s epistemology. In this limited respect, we may say that Hume opened the door to phenomenology, but as a sacrificial lamb. However, Hume was well aware of his self-defeating position, and perhaps, in some respects, the need for an alternative. Moreover, Hume’s “mistakes” may have incited Husserl’s discovery of the epoche, and thus, transcendental phenomenology.

Nikolai Lossky is key to the history of the Husserl-Rezeption in Russia. He was the first to publish a review of the Russian translation of Husserl’s first volume of the Logische Untersuchungen that appeared in 1909. He also published a presentation and criticism of Husserl’s transcendental idealism in 1939. An English translation of both of Lossky’s publications is offered in this volume for the first time. The present paper, which is intended as an introduction to these documents, situates Lossky within (...) the Rezeptionsgeschichte of Husserl in Russia and explains why he is central to it. It also explains what Lossky principally found in Husserl: he saw in the latter’s critique of psychologism support for his own ontology, epistemology, and axiology. Lossky characterizes his ontology as an ideal-realism. According to ideal-realism, both the realm of ideal beings and the realm of real beings are mind-independent. Per his epistemology, which he calls “intuitivism,” real beings are intuited by sensual intuition and ideal beings by intellectual intuition. The realm of ideal beings includes the subrealm of values, which is intuited by axiological intuition. This thoroughly realist conception contrasted sharply with the subjectivist tendencies of the time. So, when Lossky took cognizance of Husserl’s critique of psychologism, he thereupon found an ally in his battle against the various subjectivisms. But, when Husserl took the transcendental idealist turn, Lossky was at the forefront of the backlash against the new direction Husserl wanted to give to phenomenology. (shrink)

Naturalism in twentieth century philosophy is founded on the rejection of ‘first philosophy’, as can be seen in Quine’s rejection of what he calls ‘cosmic exile’. Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology falls within the scope of what naturalism rejects, but I argue that the opposition between phenomenology and naturalism is less straightforward than it appears. This is so not because transcendental phenomenology does not involve a problematic form of exile, but because naturalism, in its recoil from transcendental philosophy, creates a new form (...) of exile, what I call in the paper ‘exile from within’. These different forms of exile are the result of shared epistemological aspirations, which, if set aside, leave open the possibility of phenomenology without exile. In the conclusion of the paper, I appeal to Merleau-Ponty as an example of what phenomenology without epistemology might look like. (shrink)

In this paper I explore Husserl’s and Foucault’s approaches to the historical a priori and defend Husserl’s richer notion. Foucault borrows the expression ‘historical a priori’ from Husserl and there are continuities, but also significant and ultimately irreconcilable differences, between their conceptions. Both are looking for ‘conditions of possibility,’ forms of ‘institution’ or instauration, and patterns of transformation, for scientific knowledge. Husserl identifies the ‘a priori of history’ with the ‘historical a priori’ and believes that the ‘invariant essential structures of (...) the historical world’ can be identified. Foucault, on the other hand, is less interested in the Kantian inquiry into the limits or legitimization of knowledge than in the relation between knowledge and power. Foucault rejects the idea of universal and necessary a priori structures and denies that the structure of the conceptual framework governing an era can be fully determined. Both Foucault and Husserl contrast ‘inner’ history with external history, but, I argue, Foucault misconstrues Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology as a form of ‘absolute subjectivity’ against which his ‘archaeological’ method reacts. In fact, Foucault’s own conception of the historical a priori is ambiguous and fails to have explanatory value precisely because it misunderstands the need for the a priori to be both universal and necessary, and offers no account of the ‘a priori of historicity’ which, for Husserl, is essential to human cultural life. (shrink)

Damian Byers analyzes the form Husserl gives to the problem of knowledge—the way this form influences the development of the phenomenological method, and the results of its application. In a very clear fashion, Byers presents Husserl’s understanding of the roles of intentionality, idealism, temporalization, and kinesthesia in the constitution of knowledge. Drawing upon all of Husserl’s major texts, he corrects many misapprehensions about Husserl’s doctrines of intentionality and idealism. Byers argues that Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology is both a philosophy of closure (...) and control and a philosophy of openness and vulnerability. (shrink)

This collection explores the structure of consciousness and its place in the world, or inversely the structure of the world and the place of consciousness in it. Amongst the topics covered are: the phenomenological aspects of experience, dependencies between experience and the world and the basic ontological categories found in the world at large. Developing ideas drawn from historical figures such as Descartes, Husserl, Aristotle, and Whitehead, the essays together demonstrate the interdependence of ontology and phenomenology and its significance for (...) the philosophy of mind. (shrink)

This paper aims to address the relevance of the natural sciences for transcendental phenomenology, that is, the issue of naturalism. The first section distinguishes three varieties of naturalism and corresponding forms of naturalization: an ontological one, a methodological one, and an epistemological one. In light of these distinctions, in the second section, I examine the main projects aiming to “naturalize phenomenology”: neurophenomenology, front-loaded phenomenology, and formalized approaches to phenomenology. The third section then considers the commitments of Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology with (...) respect to the three varieties of naturalism previously discussed. I argue that Husserl rejected strong and weak forms of epistemological naturalism, strong methodological naturalism, and ontological naturalism. The fourth section presents the argument that Husserl endorsed a weak, conditional form of methodological naturalism. This point is illustrated with Husserl’s proposal of “somatology,” a natural science apt to study the corporeality of the lived body. The final section addresses the complementarity and respective limits of the transcendental phenomenological and the natural scientific frameworks. I argue that, on Husserl’s account, the function of transcendental phenomenology with respect to the natural sciences is to provide them with an epistemological foundation and an ontological clarification. I suggest that certain natural sciences can be understood, within the transcendental phenomenological framework, as “sciences of constitution,” that is, as sciences investigating the contribution of real structures acting as conditions of possibility for the occurrence of certain kinds of comprehensive unities in lived experience. (shrink)

From the general history of culture, with a particular attention turned towards the personal and intellectual relationships between Hermann Weyl and Edmund Husserl, it will be possible to identify certain historical-critical moments from which a philosophical reflection concerning aspects of the ontology of mathematics may be carried out. In particular, a notable epistemological relevance of group theory methods will stand out.

This paper distinguishes four senses of naturalism: reductive physicalism; a naturalism that departs from what Thompson calls “natural-historical judgments”; a naturalism that recognizes that physical nature is located within the space of reasons; and a phenomenological naturalism that shifts the focus to the “natural” experiences of subjects who encounter the world. The paper argues for a “phenomenological neo-Aristotelianism” that accounts both for the internal justification of our first-order moral experience and the need for a broader grounding in a universalistic account (...) of the goods of agency. (shrink)

In the present paper, I try to shed some light on the Munich-Göttingen conception of essences, laws of essence, and ideal objects. I first start with a preliminary account of their conception of the synthetic a priori at the basis of their conception of essence (§2); I then offer a first characterization of this conception, which I label as metaphysical realism (§3), highlighting its key concept: foundation (§4). In the last four sections (§§5-8), I discuss different outcomes of this conception (...) of essences: the nature of laws of essences (§5), different categories of essences (§6) and anumericity (§7). (shrink)

I argue that recent rationalists' accounts of a priori knowledge suffer from two substantial weaknesses: an inadequate phenomenology of a priori insight , and the error of psychologism. I show that Husserl's theory of a priori knowledge presents a defensible and viable alternative for the contemporary rationalist, an alternative that addresses both the ontology and phenomenology of rational intuition, as well as such contemporary concerns as the possibility and character of a priori error, the empirical defeasibility of a priori claims, (...) the relation of mind to necessity, and the role of conception and imagination in a priori knowledge. Consequently, I conclude that Husserl's theory provides the needed response to the 20 th century critique of rationalism, and its attendant a priorism, as mysterious and obscure. (shrink)

This dissertation concerns the possibility of a viable foundational philosophy in the phenomenologies of Husserl and Merleau-Ponty. Since a phenomenological foundation is an irruption out of, and a reaction against, the inability of modern science and the philosophy which supplies its presuppositions, to provide an adequate foundation, a critical examination of science is a necessary moment in the formulation of the sense, and the justification for a phenomenological foundation. We characterize the rigorous science of phenomenology as the attempt to grasp (...) an apriori science which is neither a construction nor an abstraction. In the return "to the things themselves," Husserl identifies and dispels the theoretical biases of modernity. Of equal importance, is the necessity of grounding the primacy of phenomena over the theoretical abstraction called science. We also examine Husserl's analysis and critique of the historical western telos and its aberrational form in the modern interpretation. We argue that a foundational quest is necessary from a meta-ethical point of view. ;In order to amplify and corroborate the Husserlian thesis, the historical thesis of Hugh Kearney concerning the metaphysical genesis of science and the structural thesis of Thomas Kuhn concerning the paradigmatic style of science are promoted. The presuppositions of Cartesianism are then elaborated and their subsequent influence, especially manifest in the problems of experimental psychology, is highlighted. ;A second criticism is developed concerning the problematics in the Husserlian foundation itself. Through our own investigations and the criticisms of Merleau-Ponty, we demonstrate that the essential weakness involves the unwarranted bifurcation of Form and Matter within the doctrine of intentionality. This erroneous separation of these moments assumes the dualistic subject/object dichotomy as manifest in the foundation. This ontological partitioning is overcome by Merleau-Ponty through uncovering the pre-conscious constitution of bodily intentionality. The lived-body is neither consciousness nor thing, but is the transcendental foundation prior to the consciousness versus thing conceptual abstraction. Finally, we demonstrate the importance of Merleau-Ponty's gestural theory of language in order to promote the most viable foundational philosophy of our time, the phenomenology of Merleau-Ponty. (shrink)

This article discusses three different approaches to human knowledge. The first is that of Peter Simons, a linguistic philosopher, who suggests that language has an underlying algebraic structure. The second approach is that of Ernest Nagel, a philosopher of science, who maintains that the key to knowledge lies in logical analysis. The third approach, due to Michael Polanyi, stresses the idea of tacit integration of parts into composite wholes. All three employ hierarchical schemes, the first two work from the top (...) down, whereas Polanyi works from the bottom up, using the idea of ‘emergence’. (shrink)

There is clearly some relationship between Husserl's transcendental idealist phenomenology and skepticism about the objects of the external world. Husserl himself says that skepticism "draws its power in secret" from the phenomenological "dimension," or that phenomenology overcomes skepticism by "making it true in a higher sense" . My dissertation attempts to explain precisely what that relation is. I focus on Husserl's views at the time he wrote book I of the Ideen, and I make use of the analysis of skepticism (...) found in the early parts of Stanley Cavell's Claim of Reason. As a means to this end, I establish a parallel between the Thomistic metaphysics of causation and the epistemologies of Husserl and Cavell. It emerges that Husserl is, in a sense, able to refute the Cavellian skeptic, but that this comes at an extremely high price: in effect, the deification of the ego, which in turn renders absurd the basis of morality. I close by asking how we ought to respond to such a metaphysically "dangerous" doctrine, and in particular by pointing out that the danger may lie less in the doctrine than in the response. (shrink)

The dissertation deals with the historical and philosophical relationship between Leibniz and Husserl. The historical focus concerns Husserl's own interpretation and understanding of Leibniz as inferred from his logical writings, as well as his appropriation of the Leibnizian locutions, "monad" and "monadology." The philosophical concern deals with the relationship between epistemology and phenomenology. ;In the first portion of the paper, I address the problems of Leibniz's conceptualism. Towards remedying some of the well-known problems with his conceptual metaphysics, I refer to (...) his largely neglected writings in epistemology and the philosophy of mind. I contend Leibniz does provide a theory of non-conceptual content to compensate for some of the pitfalls of his conceptualism. ;In the second portion of the paper, I argue for the claim that Husserl's own works in philosophical logic and epistemology may be characterized as Leibnizian. I provide historical documentation in support of my view that Husserl enjoyed, in fact, a fairly sophisticated familiarity with Leibniz's metaphysics, which he relied upon in the development of what he calls "formal ontology." I then provide an explanation of the development of phenomenology as the discipline concerned primarily with taking care of the sort of non-conceptual content indicated by the limits of Leibniz's metaphysics. In this light, I go on to provide an explanation of Husserl's own "phenomenological monadology.". (shrink)

The paper provides a reconstruction of the notion of material Apriori while exhibiting the anti-Kantian inspiration and factual grounding thereof. The attempt is made to show that a non-formal Apriori obtains because the sensuous has a normative character; further, that the difference between material and formal eidetic laws is rooted in the difference between sensuous contents, given in experience, and intellectual contents, originating in activities of judgement. The material Apriori is not independent of all experience, since it is grounded on (...) sensuous eidetic contents and thus depends on the latter’s givenness and characteristics. It is thanks precisely to this ,contingency‘ that it has an ontological significance. (shrink)