In this article, I aim to cast light on the genetic analyses of the apperception of the other that the phenomenologist Marc Richir develops in his late masterwork Phénoménologie en esquisses (2000). My reading hypothesis is that these analyses consist in the original contribution that Richir makes to the standard phenomenological account of empathy from within his overall project of a non-standard revision/refoundation of the Husserlian genetic phenomenology. To test this hypothesis, I trace Richir’s reinterpretation of two texts from Husserl’s (...) so-called phenomenology of intersubjectivity (Hua XIII, 10 and 13), in which Husserl interweaves together the questions of the I’s implication in phantasy and of the apprehension of the other’s living body by presentification. As my examination develops, I show that Richir finds in these texts the phenomenological attestation of the nomadic and presubjective phantasia that, on his reading, Husserl had discovered in his earlier 1904–05 lectures on phantasy. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Phantasia Thought Notes Bibliography.

Qu’est-ce qui fait qu’un discours atteint son effet? Comment évaluer celui-ci? Au premier siècle, Pseudo-Longin compose le traité Du Sublime et y étudie ce qui mène l’expression linguistique à son plus haut degré d’efficacité. Pour l’atteindre, un rôle fondamental est attribué à la phantasia, assimilée par la plupart des auteurs anciens à ce qui, dans le discours, produit des « images ». Le texte qui suit s’arrête à démontrer, d’une part, la place occupée par Pseudo-Longin dans le long débat (...) philosophique et rhétorique sur la phantasia et, d’autre part, sa contribution à la compréhension de celle-ci. Associée par métonymie à la vision, la phantasia s’adresse à l’ensemble des sensations et correspond à l’art de faire sentir le discours en chair propre. Réussie, elle permet la communication des sensations entre le discours, l’orateur et le public. (shrink)

Dans le cadre de sa théorie de la production des figures géométriques par projection des raisons innées, Proclus est le premier à assimiler la phantasia (imagination) au nous pathetikos (intellect passif) évoqué furtivement par Aristote en De Anima III,5. Tout en maintenant cette assimilation, Ammonius (ré)intègrera la notion d’ epinoia dans le processus d’abstraction, statut de la chose abstraite du monde sensible. L’introduction de cette notion provoquera une certaine confusion chez les commentateurs ultérieurs qui, tout en gardant l’assimilation de (...) Proclus, n’hésiteront pas à faire de la phantasia la faculté intellective permettant d’abstraire les formes de la matière en étroite collaboration avec l’intellect actif, de séparer les accidents d’un substrat et de composer des êtres et formes sans substrat. (shrink)

Que quelque chose de notre " nature humaine " se trouve étrangement éclairé par l'analyse phénoménologique des rapports complexes entre phantasia, imagination et affectivité, telle est l'énigme qui traverse ce livre comme un fil rouge. Autant la phénoménologie comme telle s'occupe des phénomènes en leur statut transcendantal, autant la précision qui leur est apportée par la prise en compte de leur dimension imaginative et affective, conduit-elle à délimiter, à l'intérieur de la phénoménologie, le champ de l'anthropologie phénoménologique. Et, à (...) l'intérieur de ce champ, les psychopathologies sont un véritable révélateur. Les analyses phénoménologiques qui en sont proposées ici conduisent à prendre la mesure, souvent démesurée, de l'homme, et à affiner en retour les structures que la phénoménologie dégage pour sa part. Analyses en zigzags ou en spirale qui permettent de voir et de décrire les rivages d'une terre, mais qui est une terra incognita : la nôtre. Voyage long, difficile, aventureux où l'énigme reste entière mais a changé de visage. Alors qu'il y a quelque chose de non humain dans la rationalité, et qui a tant séduit la tradition philosophique, dans le champ qui se découvre ici, l'imagination, dans ses rapports complexes avec l'affectivité, paraît, en écho à Nietzsche, humaine, trop humaine. Lieu d'illusions multiples, affectives, mais aussi axiologiques, au plus loin de toute idéologie et de toute évaluation, toutes deux ratiocinantes, au plus près d'une reprise lucide des horizons symboliques de l'institution symbolique dans laquelle nous vivons et qui nous fait vivre. La question est peut-être finalement: qu'est-ce que vivre, et vivre humainement? Vivre, et non pas être? (shrink)

Phantasia ist ein terminologischer Ausdruck aus Aristoteles’ philosophischer Psychologie. Er bezeichnet das Vermögen von Lebewesen, Wahrnehmungsgehalte auch in Abwesenheit externer Wahrnehmungsgegenstände mental gegenwärtig zu haben. Der Ausdruck leitet sich her von dem Verb phainomai und ist nicht zu verwechseln mit dem in der Wortgestalt identischem phantasia, dem aus phainomai gebildeten nomen abstractum, das kein seelisches Vermögen bezeichnet, sondern so viel wie ›Erscheinung‹, ›geistiges Bild‹ oder ›subjektiver Eindruck‹ bedeutet.

Cet article a pour objet premier de tenter d’expliciter deux notions importantes de la psychologie platonicienne, celles de phantasia et de phantasma. L’auteur, par une analyse de certains passages clés des Dialogues, tente de retracer la genèse de la distinction de ces deux notions, jusqu’à leurs définitions dans le Sophiste. Cette explicitation révèle, simultanément, le lien étroit que chacune de ces notions entretient avec la doxa ou opinion.— The purpose of this article is to try to clarify two important (...) notions of the platonic psychology, namely those of phantasia and of phantasma. The author, through analysis of key excerpts from the Dialogs, tries to relate the genesis of the distinction of these two notions, until their definitions in the Sophist. This explanation simultaneously reveals the link that both notions have with the doxa. (shrink)

Abstract Aristotle's account of Phantasia in De Anima 3.3 is notoriously difficult to decipher. At one point he describes Phantasia as a capacity for producing images, but then later in the same chapter it is clear Phantasia is supposed to explain appearances, such as why the sun appears to be a foot wide. Many commentators argue that images cannot explain appearances, and so they claim that Aristotle is using Phantasia in two different ways. In this paper (...) I argue that images actually explain perceptual appearances for Aristotle, and so Phantasia always refers to images. I take a new approach to interpreting DA 3.3, reading it alongside Plato's Theaetetus and Sophist . In the Theaetetus , Socrates explains how memory gives rise to perceptual appearance. I claim that Aristotle adopts Socrates' account of perceptual appearance, but what Socrates calls memory, Aristotle calls Phantasia. (shrink)

In De Anima III.3 Aristotle presents his official discussion of phantasia (“imagination” in most translations). At the very outset of the discussion Aristotle offers as an endoxon that “phantasia is that in virtue of which we say that a phantasma occurs to us” (428a1-2). Now a natural reading of this claim, taken up by many commentators, can pose a problem for Aristotle’s overall account of perception. Here I argue that, although it would be silly to deny that Aristotle (...) considers phantasia to be that in virtue of which a phantasma occurs to someone, it is not silly to deny that phantasmata are present in every case in which phantasia is operative. This suggestion bolsters the idea that, according to Aristotle’s account of veridical perception, we can understand the world as making itself perceptually manifest to the perceiver. (shrink)

Este artículo se basa en el texto nº1 del tomo XXIII de Husserliana, Phantasia, conciencia de imagen, recuerdo. En primer lugar entendemos que Husserl es el mayor crítico de la filosofía de la representación que ha dado el siglo XX. No sólo en punto a la percepción; también, como se verá, en punto a la phantasia. Sin embargo, por la misma razón, probablemente ha sido también el más fino analista del fenómeno de la representación entendido, ahora sí, como (...) conciencia de imagen. Husserl estudia el fenómeno de la conciencia de imagen en el texto principal de Hua XXIII, diseccionándolo, con una acribia sin precedentes, en sus componentes de soporte físico (ausente en el caso de la Imagination o la Einbildungskraft, a distinguir de la phantasia), Bildobjekt y Bildsujet. Mención especial merece el escurridizo estatuto ontológico (de innúmeras consecuencias, por ejemplo en psicopatología) del Bildobjekt que se entiende, en términos de Husserl, como Fiktum. Phantasia de un lado, imaginación y conciencia de imagen de otro, constituyen dos tipos esencialmente distintos de acto, con estructuras distintas. La phantasia es un acto tan directo e inmediato como la percepción, y carece de toda mediación por un Bildobjekt. A la luz del texto nº1 de Hua XXIII recogemos las características del no presente de la phantasia (distinto del no presente de la imaginación): la phantasia, amén de no presente, es proteiforme, intermitente y discontinua. Las paradojas relativas a los phantasmata de las apariciones de phantasia (Phantasieerscheinungen) nos conducirán a proponer una nueva interpretación de la representificación (Vergegenwärtigung) phantaseante como retemporalización en presencia (sin presente asignable). Por último analizamos el proceso de transposición arquitectónica de la phantasia en imaginación para terminar retomando la crítica, esbozada al principio del texto, de la perspectiva de las neurociencias en el análisis de la conciencia. tent and discontinuous. The paradoxes which then emerge with regard to the phantasmata of the phantasia appearances (Phantasieerscheinungen) will lead us to propose a new interpretation of the phantasizing presentification (Vergegenwärtigung) as retemporalization in praesentia (without any assignable present). Last but not least, an analysis is provided of the process of architectonical transposition of. (shrink)

In De Anima III 10, Aristotle introduces the notion of phantasía logistikē as one of the principles of rational action. On the basis of some texts from De Anima and the Nicomachean Ethics, the paper seeks to interpret the place of that type of imagination in practical reasoning. To that e ect, it rst sets forth Aristotle’s doctrine regarding the principles of action and the issue of their articulation, and then goes on to discuss the role of rational imagination in (...) the con guration of the object of desire. (shrink)

RESUMEN En De Anima III 10, Aristóteles introduce la noción de phantasía logistikē como uno de los principios de la acción racional. A partir de la exposición de algunos textos del De Anima y de Ética a Nicómaco, se busca interpretar el lugar de aquel tipo de imaginación en el razonamiento práctico. Para ello, se presenta primero la doctrina aristotélica de los principios de la acción y la problemática de su articulación, y luego se discute el papel de la imaginación (...) racional en la configuración del objeto del deseo. ABSTRACT In De Anima III 10, Aristotle introduces the notion of phantasía logistikē as one of the principles of rational action. On the basis of some texts from De Anima and the Nicomachean Ethics, the paper seeks to interpret the place of that type of imagination in practical reasoning. To that effect, it first sets forth Aristotle's doctrine regarding the principles of action and the issue of their articulation, and then goes on to discuss the role of rational imagination in the configuration of the object of desire. (shrink)

El presente estudio busca clarificar el papel de la phantasia en la refundacion de la fenomenologia transcendental de Marc Richir (en particular desde Phenomenologie en esquisses, de 2000). A partir del analisis de la phantasia y de la imaginacion ��que toma apoyo en las Lecciones de Husserl de 1904/1905�� el autor pone de manifiesto la relacion de la phantasia tanto con la percepcion como con el lenguaje, al tiempo que trata de elucidar el estatuto temporal de dichos (...) elementos. (shrink)

Le présent article vise à montrer qu'on ne peut ranger Aristote parmi les « intellectualistes tempérés » que si l'on privilégie la représentation de l'objet désirable par rapport à la faculté motrice elle-même, qui est bien la faculté désirante et elle seule. Si la phantasia semble être finalement la seule faculté cognitive dont on ne saurait se passer pour se mouvoir et agir, c'est parce qu'elle régit la forme de base du mode de présentation du désirable ou bien pratique, (...) qui est celle de l'apparaître. The present article is arguing that Aristotle can be ranked amongst the « moderate intellectualists » only if we put the stress on the representation of the desirable rather than on the faculty which produces movement, which is really the faculty of desire alone. If the phantasia seems to be ultimately the alone cognitive faculty which is needed for moving and acting, it is because it rules the most basic form of mode of presentation for the desirable or practical good, which is appearing. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Aristotle’s Phantasia in the Rhetoric:Lexis, Appearance, and the Epideictic Function of DiscourseNed O’GormanIntroductionThe well-known opening line of Aristotle's Rhetoric, where he defines rhetoric as a "counterpart" (antistrophos) to dialectic, has spurred many conversations on Aristotelian rhetoric and motivated the widespread interpretation of Aristotle's theory of civic discourse as heavily rationalistic. This study starts from a statement in the Rhetoric less discussed, yet still important, that suggests that a (...) visual aspect inheres in Aristotle's theory of rhetoric. Near the beginning of book 3, which deals with lexis (style, sometimes subsuming delivery1 ), Aristotle conjoins lexis and phantasia with the copula "is" (eimi): "The subject of expression [lexeôs], however, has some small necessary place in all teaching; for to speak in one way rather than another does make some difference in regard to clarity, though not a great difference; but all these things are forms of outward show [phantasia] and intended to affect the audience" (1404a).2 Whereas scholars exploring the relationship between rhetoric and dialectic have compared and contrasted the Rhetoric and the Topics, I explore rhetoric's relationship with phantasia by reading the Rhetoric alongside De Anima. De Anima is Aristotle's seminal account of the senses and their relationship to psychê (often translated "soul"). It addresses topics intimately connected to rhetoric: perception, cognition, deliberation, visualization, imagination, and the image. Phantasia is integral to each of these psychic processes and to Aristotle's understanding of the function of appearance in human experience. Hence, itis a lens suitable for exploring the relationship between Aristotle's conception of civic discourse and his notions of sight and appearances as they relate to perception, interpretation, deliberation, and judgment. I find in Aristotle's phantasia a tie between his art of rhetoric and his psychology and phenomenology (anachronistic though these terms are). Aristotle's psychological works, as Richard McKeon points out, are foundational to Aristotle's philosophy, and thus to his Rhetoric. [End Page 16] "Psychological inquiries occupy an extremely important position in the philosophy of Aristotle, for the conception of the psychê lays the foundation for the continuity of functions in nature" (1947, 142). De Anima, especially, articulates the psychological and phenomenological conceptions often tacitly at work in the Rhetoric.The importance of phantasia for the trajectory of ancient rhetorical and aesthetic theory is seen in the parallels between the visual arts, rhetoric, and poetics in Greek and Roman thought.3 As David Freedberg states (perhaps, slightly overstates), parallels between painting and poetry are "to be found everywhere in classical literature" (1989, 50). With respect to such visual-verbal parallels in Aristotle, D. Thomas Benediktson's reading of Aristotle's psychological, poetic, and rhetorical works concludes that phantasia ties together the visual and the literary. "[Aristotle's passages on phantasia] do help to see why Aristotle took for granted the similarity, almost the identity, of literature and the visual arts. Both types of art are imagistic; they present to the viewer either an image, as in visual art, or as in literature, a set of moving images that the soul then uses as raw data (phantasia) to enable thought to occur" (2000, 170). Phantasia developed a legacy in Hellenistic aesthetics, where it came to designate suprarealism in painting, moving art "beyond imitation" (Fowler 1989, 180–81). In later Greco-Roman works, phantasia was used to designate vivid imagery in written and oral discourse, imagery that could create sights and scenes in the minds of audience members. As Quintilian noted in his discussion of forensic rhetoric, in Latin phantasiai were termed visiones. Here, phantasiabecame a mode of displacing narrative in rhetorical discourse:There are certain experiences which the Greeks call phantasiai, and the Romans visions [visiones], whereby things absent are presented to our imagination with such extreme vividness that they seem actually to be before our very eyes.... From such impressions arises that enargeia which Cicero calls illumination [illustration] and actuality [evidential], which makes us seem not so much to narrate [dicere] as to exhibit [ostendere] the actual scene.(Institutio Oratoria 4.2.29, 32)Quintilian's invocations of phantasia and enargeia can be traced to Aristotle's discussion of rhetorical style in book... (shrink)

The early Greek Stoics were the first philosophers to recognize the object of normal human perception as predicative or propositional in nature. Fundamentally we do not perceive qualities or things, but situations and things happening, facts. To mark their difference from Plato and Aristotle, the Stoics adopted phantasia as their word for perception.

Introduction: Aristotle's phantasia and the ancient concept of imagination -- Visualization, vividness (enargeia) and realism -- Mathematical projection, copying and analogy -- Prophecy, inspiration and allegory -- Conclusion: ancient and modern imagination.

Critics of Aristotelian accounts of practical reasoning, in teaching and in other contexts, criticise phronesis for its rigidity and lack of imagination. This paper argues that phantasia, or imagination, helps us to develop a richer account of Aristotle’s phronesis. Two senses of phantasia, as producing images and as an interpretive faculty, are proposed here to be importantly involved in phronesis. By producing images that help in the selection of an end goal, and by having an interpretive faculty that (...) helps to compare competing possibilities, phantasia plays a crucial role in the practical reasoning process of phronesis. (shrink)

Actor Paul Giamatti and philosopher Stephen Asma collaborate to describe the imagination (phantasia) as a form of embodied cognition. They explore the actor's ability to replicate embodied affective states and communicate those to audiences that are capable of catching (via emotional contagion) those affective states. The role of social affordances in imaginative work is explored. Finally, the role of imagination in political conspiracy thinking is considered.

In theOrigin of the work of art, Heidegger claimed that the work of art opens to us thetruth of Being, the opening of the world. Two problematics arise from this. First, his idea of “world-disclosure” evoked a sense ofeverydayness(which captures, for me, the idea of credulism in perception). Second, the senses oftruth,Being, andworldare metaphysically condensed. Hence the question: how then could the “truth of Being” or the “world” that artworks reveal be experienced? Among other ways (mimesis, imagination, perception, etc.) by (...) which artworks are experienced, I choose to examine perception since it confirms this idea ofeverydayness. The questions that confront us to this effect are: can perception lead us into, to encounter, this world opened by artworks? Does the nervous/visual system suffice to enter into that world in which the artist invites us? This is where Richir becomes important. In response to the first problem, he shows that the “perception” (experience) of artworks is beyond mereeverydaynesssince artworks open for us a world that “never was” and “never will be” (i.e., “virtuality” and not a veridical sense ofeverydaynessas captured in the perceptive act that is object-related). This is because the material stuff or object given in perception is neutralized by thephantasiato become what Richir callsSache. ThisSacheis in itself a phenomenon that is disclosed in artworks. In response to the second problem, Richir shows how artworks cannot disclose just metaphysical categories ofBeing, truth, or world. The disclosure has to be phenomenological, corporeal, and affective. He therefore proposes another mode of “perception” beyondmere perceptionin a revolutionary interpretation of the husserlian “perceptive”phantasia.With this, he shows how the aforementioned metaphysical condensations are liveable in experience. I concretize this with an illustration from the theater. Finally, I suggest participation as a phenomenological approach that can make both Heidegger’s and Richir’s intuitions meaningful. (shrink)

Pt. I. The apparent good. Evaluative cognition -- Perceiving the good -- Phantasia and the apparent good -- pt. II. The apparent good and non-rational motivation. Passions and the apparent good -- Akrasia and the apparent good -- pt. III. The apparent good and rational motivation. Phantasia and deliberation -- Happiness, virtue, and the apparent good -- Practical induction -- Conclusion : Aristotle's practical empiricism.

Notion essentielle au croisement de la psychologie, de l'ethique et de l'esthetique de la tradition occidentale, la phantasia des Grecs, devenue imaginatio dans le monde latin avant d'etre traduite dans les differentes langues europeennes, a connu un echo considerable tout au long de l'histoire de la pensee philosophique. Les etudes rassemblees dans le present volume sont issues d'un seminaire et d'une journee d'etudes qui se sont tenus en 2001 a l'Universite catholique de Louvain et aux Facultes Notre-Dame de la (...) Paix de Namur. Elles visent a eclairer l'evolution du sens et du role de la notion au travers d'etapes historiques particulieres, surtout anciennes, s'echelonnant du VIe siecle avant Jesus-Christ au XVIIe siecle de notre ere. (shrink)

Born as φαντασία in Greek philosophy, the concept of imagination that today we understand from has a different meaning and contains different functions. This study attempts to reveal the conceptual contents and functions by examining the conceptual transformation of the concept in Ancient Greece and Aristotle’s terminology and epistemological function.

O presente artigo examina a maneira como João Filopono se apropria da noção aristotélica de phantasía no seu comentário ao De anima de Aristóteles. O objetivo deste exame é mostrar a articulação entre a recepção e interpretação de Filopono a respeito da phantasía e as estratégias de defesa da incorruptibilidade e impassibilidade do intelecto elaboradas pelo comentador. Com isso, esperamos lançar alguma luz sobre a complexa trajetória de transmissão da referida noção e problematizar, ainda que em linhas muito gerais, a (...) tentativa de estabelecer correspondência significativa entre a disputa pelo sentido da phantasía aristotélica no século VI e no século XX. (shrink)

The main endeavor of this project is to elucidate the correlation of two basic phenomenological concepts (typification and Phantasia), thereby allowing for a new discussion concerning the foundation of the life-world. While typification has been particularly developed in the social phenomenology of A. Schutz, Phantasia remains in a rather Husserlian “domain,” with regard to its phenomenological implications. In considering a new perspective, however, their discussion lends itself to a new understanding of the process of constitution. Namely, it will (...) surpass the so-called egological sphere, by incorporating new valences for the structures of the life-world. Even if Phantasia is to be understood in terms of a subjective zone “par excellence,” its correlation to the constant realization of typification will help to circumscribe how Phantasia can condition and contribute to the realization of the life-world on a larger scale. (shrink)

When translating phantasia as ‘imagination’, one commits a dangerous anachronism: interpreting the Greek concept from the vantage point of a modern, post-Kantian framework which sees imagination as a faculty mediating between sensibility and reasoning. A close reading of the Aristotelian sources shows why phantasia cannot be identifi ed as a distinct faculty, but rather designates a transversal power common to all psychic acts. The article argues that a more adequate translation of phantasia would be ‘visualization’.