On the completion and generalization of intuitive space in der raum: Husserlian and drieschian elements
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The paper focuses on some puzzles about Carnap's intended epistemological point in the "completion" and "generalization" of the Anschauungsraum in sec. II of Der Raum (leaving aside the technical problems which also arise). Since any global structure at all requires that eidetic intuition be supplemented with freely-chosen postulates and/or intuitively unmotivated generalizations, it is unclear, as several authors have pointed out, how and in what sense "intuitive space" as a whole represents a distinctive, a priori contribution to our knowledge. I suggest a way of approaching this issue based on Carnap's sources -- in particular, Husserl and Driesch, both of whom he repeatedly claims to be following. The idea of a severely finite realm of possible intuition, which both requires and allows supplementation with an infinite conceptual structure, is central to Husserl's thought, and, I argue, it would be natural for Carnap to rely on it in attempting to reconcile Husserlian eidetic intuition with the general theory of relativity. That this larger conceptual structure owes its details to free postulation is, on the other hand, decidedly un-Husserlian. But here, I claim, Carnap takes his cue from Driesch's view, in the first edition of the Ordnungslehre, that natural actuality is the result of a certain demand for order: we demand such order in natural things and reject as non-actual (hallucinatory, dreamed, etc.) whatever nature-like elements of experience fail to fit into it. In conclusion I suggest that more radical versions of this particular constellation of ideas provide the key to understanding much of Carnap's later thought.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
René Jagnow (2006). Edmund Husserl on the Applicability of Formal Geometry. In Emily Carson & Renate Huber (eds.), Intuition and the Axiomatic Method. Springer. 67--85.
Pedro M. S. Alves (2008). Objective Time and the Experience of Time: Husserl's Theory of Time in Light of Some Theses of A. Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity. [REVIEW] Husserl Studies 24 (3):205-229.
Norma yunez-naude (2003). What is Carnap's Conventionalism After All? Synthese 137 (1-2):261 - 272.
Patrick Madigan (2011). The Young Carnap's Unknown Master: Husserl's Influence on Der Raum and Der Logische Aufbau der Welt. By Guillermo E. Rosado Haddock. Heythrop Journal 52 (1):157-157.
Dale Jacquette (2009). The Young Carnap's Unknown Master: Husserl's Influence onDer RaumandDer Logische Aufbau Der Welt. History and Philosophy of Logic 30 (2):194-200.
Thomas Mormann (2005). Carnap's Metrical Conventionalism Versus Differential Topology. Proc. 2004 Biennial Meeting of the PSA, vol. I, Contributed Papers 72 (5):814 - 825.
Abraham Stone (2010). On the Sources and Implications of Carnap's Der Raum. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (1):65-74.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads10 ( #118,353 of 1,006,259 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,735 of 1,006,259 )
How can I increase my downloads?