Abstract
Whitford states in her preface that the limits of Merleau-Ponty's critique of Sartre form the limits of her investigation. Since Merleau-Ponty had little to say about Sartre's later development, except that it brought to light certain contradictions inherent in his ontology, the discussion centers around L'Etre et le néant. In effect, Merleau-Ponty, even after his break with Sartre, never ceased returning to that work in order to challenge some of its premises, speculate upon its implications, and use it as a point of reference in the elaboration of his own phenomenology. Whitford has done a solid job of analyzing this rather one-way dialogue between the two thinkers. Her method is expository and her approach unbias. Unlike Simone de Beauvoir, who defended Sartre against Merleau-Ponty's criticisms by arguing that they were based upon flagrant misinterpretations and misrepresentations, Whitford attempts to expose, with straightforward lucidity, the validity as well as shortcomings of Merleau-Ponty's critique.