The paper aims to define the concept of “felt sense”, introduced in psychology and psychotherapy by E. T. Gendlin, in order to clarify its relation to bodily sensations and its difference from emotions. Gendlin’s own definition, according to which the felt sense is a conceptually vague bodily feeling with implicit meaning, is too general for this task. Gendlin’s definition is specified by pointing out, first, the different layers of awareness of bodily feelings and, second, the difference between bodily readiness for (...) action and motivation for action. According to the more precise definition, the felt sense is the awareness of readiness to act carried by the configuration of bodily sensations. The felt sense differs from emotions because it is not able to motivate the action for which it makes us ready. The article also discusses the intuition that led to the founding of Gendlin’s psychotherapeutic technique and compares it with the psychoanalytic concept of working through resistance during therapy. (shrink)

Merleau-Ponty’s attitude to psychoanalysis was ambiguous. On the one hand, he realized that the phenomena psychoanalysis deals with require to go beyond the area of ​​act intentionality, and that, from a different angle, psychoanalysis addresses the same problem as Gestalt psychology, which played the central role in Merleau-Ponty’s philosophical project. On the other hand, he explicitly rejected the terms used by Freud for conveying his discoveries. Merleau-Ponty replaced unconscious mental contents, which act on conscious behavior, by ambiguous consciousness. In the (...) Structure of Behavior and Phenomenology of Perception, he used the terms “habit,” “bad faith,” “bodily expression,” “affective intentionality,” and “body schema” to specify his notion of experiential “ambiguity.” This paper aims to present the key concepts of Merleau-Ponty’s early interpretation of the psychoanalytic concept of the unconscious. A partial task is to show how Merleau-Ponty’s concept of bad faith differs from that of Sartre, and to distinguish existential ambiguity from the psychoanalytic concept of overdetermination. (shrink)

The paper shows different approaches to creativity, i.e. emergence of new meanings, in Merleau-Ponty and Patočka. The comparison is based mainly on Merleau-Ponty’s lectures L’institution dans l’histoire personnelle et publique (1954/55) and Patočka’s project Negative Platonism (1953). Despite some similarities evident in the key concepts “institution” and “transcendence”, there is a decisive difference between the two approaches concerning the temporality of creation. Whereas Merleau-Ponty likens the temporality of institution to future perfect tense, emphasizing the intertwining of present and future events, (...) Patočka understands novelty as something totally different from the present state of affairs. In his eyes, the question of how something new can arise equals the question of how an attitude of distance to existing traditions can be achieved. Contrary to Patočka, Merleau-Ponty argues that any living tradition tends towards its own transformation and presents a case of self-transcendence because it is governed by the principle of divergence (écart). Finally, we argue that some aspects of these two approaches both complement each other, and also show the limits of each other. (shrink)

Im folgenden Text wird es mir um zwei Begriffe des Selbstseins ge­ hen, von denen der eine in Heideggers Sein und Zeit bei der Abgren­ zung der authentischen Existenz des Menschen eine entscheidende Rolle spielt, während der andere in den Modus der Uneigentlich­ keit abgeschoben wird. Ich werde den zentralen Begriff des frühen Heidegger – das Selbstsein – nehmen, um zu zeigen, dass sich hinter seiner Individualitätstheorie eine Entscheidung für einen bestimm­ ten Identitätsbegriff verbirgt. Weiterhin möchte ich eine Alternative bieten, (...) die potentiellen Einwänden von der Heideggerschen Posi­ tion aus standhalten kann, und in der Abschlussüberlegung zeigen, dass es für die Bestimmung der menschlichen Existenz notwendig ist, zwei verschiedene Begriffe des Selbstseins ins Spiel zu bringen. (shrink)

Studie mapuje Patočkovu filosofickou koncepci rozpracovanou v dosud nevydaných válečných rukopisech. Člověk dle Patočky rozvrhuje svůj smysluplný svět díky základnímu úkolu, kterému může ve svém životě dostát, nebo jej zmařit. Jeho naplnění ovšem nesplývá s převzetím vlastní individuality a konečnosti, nýbrž Patočka jej vymezuje jako vztah k nekonečnému životu, který každou individuální existenci zakládá. K tomuto nekonečnu se ale nelze vrátit jednoduchým vytržením z vědomého života, nýbrž teprve duchovní proměnou, která ukazuje nepředmětný charakter světa a přitom zachovává lidské vědomí.

Book review on R. Bernet, Force – Pulsion – Désir, Paris (Vrin) 2013, 433 str. and M. Kučera, Pud u Feuda, Praha (Karolinum) 2017, 531 str.

The paper shows connection between the cultivation of attention in Buddhist meditation vipassanā and the phenomenological theory of affectivity. At first, it shortly describes the way how the praxis of meditation achieves progress of mindfulness. Then, this experience is interpreted from the point of view of Husserl’s theory of passive constitution. Finally, it describes mindfulness in terms of the boundary between activity and passivity of human being in the world.