Graduate studies at Western
Idealistic Studies 33 (1):1-7 (2003)
|Abstract||If we trace the word phenomenon to its Greek origin, we find it is the participle of the verb, phainesthai, “to show itself.” The phenomenon is that which shows itself; it is the manifest. As Heidegger noted, phenomenology is the study of this showing. It examines how things show themselves to be what they are.1 One of the most difficult problems faced by phenomenology is the mystery of our self-showing. How do we show ourselves to be what we are? How do we manifest our selfhood to one another? To put these questions in the Husserlian context of intention and fulfillment is to ask: What do we intend when we direct ourselves to another person? What sort of fulfillment—i.e., what kind of givenness—satisfies this intention? Once we speak in terms of intention and fulfillment, we face a number of possibilities. The givenness of what we intend can exactly match our intentions. It can be other than what we intend—as is the case when we are simply mistaken. The givenness also can be less. It can, for example, not offer the detail that was part of our intentions. Finally, givenness can exceed our intentions. In showing itself, the object offers us more than what was intended. In this paper, I am going to defend the claim that this excessive givenness happens systematically when we intend another person. To intend another person is, paradoxically, to intend the other as exceeding one’s intentions. As such, the showing which manifests the presence of the other is a kind of “supersaturated givenness.” It is a givenness that makes us aware that more is being given than we can formulate in our intentions. This awareness points to the other’s freedom. It is also a moral awareness. Here, I will argue that our awareness of the other’s excessive givenness is our entrance into morality.2 I In continental philosophy, we have long been accustomed to thinking of the other, not in terms of givenness, but rather the reverse. We think of the other as not being able to be given..|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Dorothée Legrand (2009). Two Senses for 'Givenness of Consciousness'. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 8 (1):89-94.
Pessi Lyyra (2009). Two Senses for 'Givenness of Consciousness'. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 8 (1):67-87.
Donald L. Wallenfang (2010). Sacramental Givenness. Philosophy and Theology 22 (1/2):131-154.
Ivona Kučerová (2012). Grammatical Marking of Givenness. Natural Language Semantics 20 (1):1-30.
Joseph Carew (2009). The Threat of Givenness in Jean-Luc Marion. Symposium 13 (2):97-115.
Bruce V. Foltz (2004). Nature's Other Side: The Demise of Nature and the Phenomenology of Givenness. In Rethinking Nature: Essays in Environmental Philosophy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Charles Hartshorne (2002). The Structure of Givenness. In Personalism Revisited: Its Proponents and Critics. New York: Rodopi NY.
Merold Westphal (2010). Divine Givenness and Self-Givenness in Kierkegaard. In Jeffrey Hanson (ed.), Kierkegaard as Phenomenologist: An Experiment. Northwestern University Press.
Ian Leask (2003). Husserl, Givenness, and the Priority of the Self. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 11 (2):141 – 156.
Andrea Staiti (2013). A Grasp From Afar: Überschau and the Givenness of Life in Husserlian Phenomenology. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 46 (1):21-36.
Jean-Luc Marion (2002). In Excess: Studies of Saturated Phenomena. Fordham University Press.
Jean-Luc Marion (2002). Being Given: Toward a Phenomenology of Givenness. Stanford University Press.
Stephen E. Lewis (2011). &Quot;the Phenomenology of Givenness and the 'Myth of the Given'&Quot;. University of Virginia Press.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads6 ( #155,026 of 740,548 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,960 of 740,548 )
How can I increase my downloads?