From FRANZ BRENTANO's manuscripts for his Vienna lectures 1888/89. Photo by his son, Dr. John CM Brentano, Highland Park, Illinois...

The present attempt to introduce the general philosophical reader to the Phenomenological Movement by way of its history has itself a history which is pertinent to its objective. It may suitably be opened by the following excerpts from a review which Herbert W. Schneider of Columbia University, the Head of the Division for Internc.. tional Cultural Cooperation, Department of Cultural Activities of Unesco from 1953 to 56, wrote in 1950 from France: The influence of Husser! has revolutionized continental philosophies, not (...) because his philosophy has become dominant, but because any philosophy now seeks to accommodate itself to, and express itself in, phenomenological method. It is the sine qua non of critical respectability. In America, on the contrary, phenomenology is in its infancy. The aver age American student of philosophy, when he picks up a recent volume of philosophy published on the continent of Europe, must first learn the "tricks" of the phenomenological trade and then translate as best he can the real import of what is said into the kind of analysis with which he is familiar....... No doubt, American education will gradually take account of the spread of phenomenological method and terminology, but until it does, American readers of European philosophy have a severe handicap; and this applies not only to existentialism but to almost all current philosophicalliterature. (shrink)

Phenomenological Psychology in Phenomenological Philosophy [i] Introductory Remarks The chief purpose of the present chapter is to serve as a reminder. ...

A. ON THE MEANING OF PHENOMENOLOGY 1. "PHENOMENOLOGY" * "Phenomenology" is, in the 20th century, mainly the name for a philosophical movement whose primary ...

After a streamlined confrontation of husserl's phenomenology and sartre's existentialism, this paper affirms their compatibility, denies their necessary connection, pleads for their cooperation and criticizes sartre's rejection of husserl's phenomenology of the pure ego.

Among the many dichotomous cleavages among philosophers and theologians few seem to me as questionable as the Procrustean division into supematuralists and naturalists. “Naturalism” and “supernaturalism” have become party labels whose original meanings have been lost in the heat of banner-waving and slogan shouting. Even the great minds of the past, who were innocent as yet of this philosophical two-party system, are being herded into one pen or the other. And apparently few of the penkeepers are aware of the fact, (...) pointed out almost apologetically by Professor Randall, that “the usage is hardly fashionable abroad, even in England.” I, for one, confess that, not having been acclimatized in my European cave to this stern disjunction, I have to this day felt rather uneasy, if not evasive, at the outspoken or tacit expectation to line up with one faction or the other, much as my leanings were toward the other rather than toward the one. I therefore decided that some day I had to get to the bottom of this uneasiness. (shrink)

Husserl, who to my knowledge never attended a philosophical meeting—not to attend was and still is almost a sign of eminence among German philosophers—once gave as his reason: “At philosophical meetings it is only the philosophers who meet, not the philosophies.” I wonder how far he would be willing to revise this estimate, had he ever been able to attend a meeting of the APA and especially of its Western Division. At least some of our symposia seem to me determined (...) attempts to make different philosophies face each other and to talk to each other instead of past one another. (shrink)

INTRODUCTION MY MAJOR CONCERN This book does not offer a coherent philosophy of the self or of ethics. Rather it is my first attempt to present together the ...

This correspondence, still unpublished, extends over fourty years. Its significance is both biographical and philosophical. Biographically it shows Brentano's tolerant friendship for his emancipated student and Husserl's unwavering veneration for his only philosophical teacher. The philosophical issues taken up are Euclidean axiomatics, Husserl's departure from Brentano in the Logical Investigations by distinguishing two types of logic as the way out from psychologism, and the possibility of negative presentations, but not Husserl's new phenomenology. Few agreements are reached, but the dissents were (...) clarified. (shrink)