The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 12:111-118 (2007)
|Abstract||In his Allgemeine Psychologie of 1912, Natorp formulates a by now classical criticism of phenomenology. 1. Phenomenology claims to describe and analyze lived subjectivity itself. In order to do so it employs a reflective methodology. But reflection is a kind of internal perception; it is a theoretical attitude; it involves an objectification. And as Natorp then asks, how is this objectifying procedure ever going to provide us with access to lived subjectivity itself? 2. Phenomenology aims at describing the experiential structures in their pretheoretical immediacy. But every description involves the use of language, involves the use of generalizing and subsuming concepts. For the very same reason, every description and expression involves a mediation and objectification that necessarily estranges us from subjectivity itself.In his early lecture course Die Idee der Philosophie und das Weltanschauungsproblem of 1919 Heidegger responds to Natorp's challenge and attempts to show that the criticism is based on some questionable assumptions. More specifically, Heidegger argues that Natorp's criticism might be pertinent when it comes to a phenomenology based on a reflective methodology, i.e. when it comes to a Husserlian phenomenology, but it is wide of the mark when it comes to Heidegger's own hermeneutical phenomenology.In this paper I wish to present both Natorp's criticism and Heidegger's response in detail. One of the aims will be to articulate the criticism that Heidegger himself—via his discussion with Natorp—directs against a reflective phenomenology. In the final part of the paper I will then evaluate the pertinence of this criticism. Is it at all justified?|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Dan Zahavi (2003). How to Investigate Subjectivity: Natorp and Heidegger on Reflection. [REVIEW] Continental Philosophy Review 36 (2):155-176.
Sebastian Luft (2011). Subjectivity and Lifeworld in Transcendental Phenomenology. Northwestern University Press.
Ryan Hickerson (2009). Neglecting the Question of Being: Heidegger's Argument Against Husserl. Inquiry 52 (6):574 – 595.
Dan Zahavi (2007). Killing the Straw Man: Dennett and Phenomenology. [REVIEW] Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (1-2):21-43.
Pierre-François Noppen (2003). L'indication Formelle: Heidegger Et le Discours de la Phénoménologie. Dialogue 42 (03):499-.
Paul Gorner (2002). Heidegger's Phenomenology as Transcendental Philosophy. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 10 (1):17 – 33.
Leslie MacAvoy (2005). Meaning, Categories and Subjectivity in the Early Heidegger. Philosophy and Social Criticism 31 (1):21-35.
Nam-In Lee (2010). Phenomenology of Language Beyond the Deconstructive Philosophy of Language. Continental Philosophy Review 42 (4):465-481.
Matthew I. Burch (2013). The Existential Sources of Phenomenology: Heidegger on Formal Indication. European Journal of Philosophy 21 (2):258-278.
Jethro Masís (2009). La Fenomenalidad Del Fenómeno: En Torno a § 7 de Ser y Tiempo de Heidegger. Logos. Revista de Filosofía (111):89-121.
Frederic L. Bender (1983). Merleau-Ponty and Method: Toward a Critique of Husserlian Phenomenology and of Reflective Philosophy in General. Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology 14:176-195.
Sue P. Stafford & Wanda Torres Gregory (2006). Heidegger's Phenomenology of Boredom, and the Scientific Investigation of Conscious Experience. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 5 (2):155-169.
Tanja Staehler (2007). How is a Phenomenology of Fundamental Moods Possible? International Journal of Philosophical Studies 15 (3):415 – 433.
Added to index2011-12-02
Total downloads12 ( #101,164 of 722,874 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,917 of 722,874 )
How can I increase my downloads?