The paper’s central theme is the link between phenomenology and the notion of the mathesis universalis, a link articulated by Husserl in the third volume of the Ideas: “My way to phenomenology was essentially determined by the mathesis universalis.” The paper suggests three interpretations of the phenomenology—mathesis universalis nexus: the first is related to the development of Husserl’s conception of the foundations of arithmetic; the second is based on the role of the theory of manifolds in Husserl’s Logical Investigations; and (...) the third reflects the importance of the distinction between “generalization” and “formalization” for phenomenology. After examining these interpretations, the paper explores which is most helpful for understanding why Husserl distanced himself from Bolzano, arguing that the third interpretation provides the most edifying answer. (shrink)

One as transcendental and one as number -- Number and time in Being and time -- The mathematical epoch -- Conclusion : toward a continental philosophy of mathematics.

The ArgumentThe purpose of this article is to read Heidegger's critique of modern science —especially in What Is a Thing? —as evolving from ontological issues that preoccupied Heidegger in the period after the publication of Being and Time. The main issues at stake are formal ontology and its connection with mathematics and modern mathematical physics, and the distinction between formal and regional ontology. The connection between these issues constitutes Heidegger's understanding of mathematics. An exposition of Heidegger's notion of the “mathematical” (...) can help us uncover his assumptions in his critique of modern science, and give us new possibilities for evaluating it. (shrink)

This book examines the many faces of philosophy of time, including the metaphysical aspects, natural science issues, and the consciousness of time. It brings together the different methodologies of investigating the philosophy of time. It does so to counter the growing fragmentation of the field with regard to discussions, and the existing cleavage between analytic and continental traditions in philosophy. The book’s multidirectional approach to the notion of time contributes to a better understanding of time's metaphysical, physical and phenomenological aspects. (...) It helps clarify the presuppositions underpinning the analytic and continental traditions in the philosophy of time and offers ways in which the differences between them can be bridged. (shrink)

(2005). Being and Time and Brouwer's Intuitionism. Angelaki: Vol. 10, continental philosophy and the sciences the german traditionissue editor: damian veal, pp. 181-186.

I Ricœur's account of the distinction between phenomenological and cosmological time My theme concerns the notions of time and space in Ricœur's thought with special emphasis on its relation to Phenomenology. As I understand it, in Temps et récit and again in La mémoire, l'histoire, l'oubli Ricœur proposes an opposition between subjective/phenomenological time and objective/cosmological time. In La mémoire, l'histoire, l'oubli he introduces a parallel distinction between lived space and geometrical space. We can state Ricœur's position in Husserlian terms and (...) say that he is developing different regional ontologies, while I shall argue in these remarks that a certain fundamental ontology is required which will unify these different notions of space and different notions of time. Cosmic time is characterised by Ricœur as constituted by the distinction between earlier and later and by a general notion of the instant. The phenomenological notion of time is characterised by the distinction between the past and the future and its privileged instant is the present. In the third part of Temps et récit Ricœur argues for the autonomy of each notion. This autonomy is a necessary step in developing a third notion of historical time as a bridge between these two notions, the cosmic and the phenomenological. (shrink)

This paper examines Derrida's interpretation of Jean Cavaill s's critique of phenomenology in On Logic and the Theory of Science . Derrida's main claim is that Cavaill s's arguments, especially the argument based on G del's incompleteness theorems, need not lead to a total rejection of Husserl's phenomenology, but only its static version. Genetic phenomenology, on the other hand, not only is not undermined by Cavaill s's critique, but can even serve as a philosophical framework for Cavaill s's own position. (...) I will argue that Derrida's approach to Cavaill s is fruitful, facilitating the exposition of some central Cavaill sian ideas, including the notion of dialectics. Nevertheless, it is important to evaluate Derrida's own arguments against static phenomenology. I undertake such an assessment in the last section of the paper, showing that G del's theorems do not in themselves warrant rejection of static phenomenology. I base this conclusion in part on G del's own understanding of phenomenology as a philosophical basis for mathematics. (shrink)

The divide between the analytic and the continental philosophical traditions has been a major preoccupation of philosophers and historians of philosophy in the past few decades. Many attempts have been made to bridge the gap between the two traditions. Appel, Rorty, Cavell, and others, for example, have drawn to our attention profound affinities between Wittgenstein and Heidegger. But until now, it has nonetheless seemed that the divide remained firmly entrenched with respect to the thought of Heidegger and Carnap, between whom (...) there still appears to be deep alienation. Heidegger and Carnap themselves encouraged this view. Carnap’s notorious attack on Heidegger left no possibility of dialogue between the two, and for Heidegger, the conflict with Carnap continued to be momentous even in the sixties. He described the conflict between himself and Carnap as embodying the “most extreme counterpositions” of the time. (shrink)