Real and ideal determination in Husserl's 'Logical Investigations'
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
One of the permanent factors driving philosophy is the puzzle presented by our embodiment. Our consciousness is embodied. We are its embodiment; we are that curious amalgam that we try to describe in terms of mind and body. Philosophy has sought again and again to describe their relation. Yet each time it attempts this from one of these aspects, the other hides itself. From the perspective of mind, everything appears as a content of consciousness. Yet, from the perspective of the body, there are no conscious contents. There are only neural pathways and chemical processes. As thinkers as early as Locke and Leibniz realized, we may search the brain as thoroughly as we wish; within its material structure, we will never find a conscious content.[i] Both perspectives are obviously one-sided. We are both mind and body; we are determined by our conscious contents and our physical makeup. Husserl’s Logical Investigations takes account of this fact in speaking of the real and ideal determination of the subject. As embodied beings, we are subject to real causal laws. Such laws, insofar as the relate to our mental contents, take these as determined by the contents temporally proceeding them.[ii] As engaged in mind, we are also subject to the ideal laws of “authentic thought.” These are nontemporal, logical laws governing “the compatibility or incompatibility of mentally realizable contents.” In the Investigations, the problem of the mind’s relation to the body comes to a head in these two determinations. How can the same set of mental acts be subject to both causal and logical laws? How can a causally determined subject grasp an apodictically certain set of logical relations? As Theodor DeBoer puts this question: “on the one hand, these acts are empirically necessary and determined; on the other hand, an idea realizes itself in them through which they claim apodeictic validity. How can both these views be combined?”[iii]
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Peter Andras Varga (2013). The Missing Chapter From the Logical Investigations: Husserl on Lotze's Formal and Real Significance of Logical Laws. Husserl Studies 29 (3):181-209.
Arkadiusz Chrudzimski (2004). Content, Rationality and Mental Causation. Axiomathes 14 (4):307-340.
Denis Fisette (ed.) (2003). Husserl's Logical Investigations Reconsidered. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Edmund Husserl (1994). Early Writings in the Philosophy of Logic and Mathematics. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Yves Mayzaud (2006). Langage et Langue chez Husserl et Lévinas. Studia Phaenomenologica 6:139-153.
Thomas Nagel (1998). Conceiving the Impossible and the Mind-Body Problem. Philosophy 73 (285):337-52.
Saulius Geniusas (2012). Indexicality as a Phenomenological Problem. Symposium 16 (2):171-190.
Allen S. Hance (1987). Husserl's Phenomenological Theory of Logic and the Overcoming of Psychologism. Philosophy Research Archives 13:189-215.
James Mensch (2013). The Question of Naturalizing Phenomenology. Symposium: The Canadian Journal of Continental Philosophy 17 (1):210-228.
Edmund Husserl (1975). Introduction to the Logical Investigations: A Draft of a Preface to the Logical Investigations (1913). Martinus Nijhoff.
Grant Gillett (1999). Consciousness and Lesser States: The Evolutionary Foothills of the Mind. Philosophy 74 (3):331-360.
Added to index2010-08-25
Total downloads16 ( #104,305 of 1,102,963 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #297,509 of 1,102,963 )
How can I increase my downloads?