11 found
Sort by:
Disambiguations:
Michael K. Shim [9]Michael Shim [2]
See also:
Profile: Michael K. Shim (California State University, Los Angeles)
  1. Michael Shim (2011). Representationalism and Husserlian Phenomenology. Husserl Studies 27 (3):197-215.
    According to contemporary representationalism, phenomenal qualia—of specifically sensory experiences—supervene on representational content. Most arguments for representationalism share a common, phenomenological premise: the so-called “transparency thesis.” According to the transparency thesis, it is difficult—if not impossible—to distinguish the quality or character of experiencing an object from the perceived properties of that object. In this paper, I show that Husserl would react negatively to the transparency thesis; and, consequently, that Husserl would be opposed to at least two versions of contemporary representationalism. First, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Michael K. Shim (2010). Review: Nuzzo, Ideal Embodiment: Kant's Theory of Sensibility. Journal of the History of Philosophy 48 (2):pp. 248-249.
  3. Michael K. Shim (2010). Ideal Embodiment: Kant's Theory of Sensibility (Review). Journal of the History of Philosophy 48 (2):248-249.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Michael Shim (2009). Dan Zahavi. Subjectivity and Selfhood. Cambridge/London: The Mit Press, 2005, 265 Pp., $21.00/£13.95 (Paper). [REVIEW] Husserl Studies 25 (3):261-266.
  5. Michael K. Shim (2006). Leibniz on Concept and Substance. International Philosophical Quarterly 46 (3):309-325.
    A historically persistent way of reading Leibniz regards him as some kind of conceptualist. According to this interpretation, Leibniz was either an ontological conceptualist or an epistemological conceptualist. As an ontological conceptualist, Leibniz is taken to hold the view that there exist only concepts. As an epistemological conceptualist, he is seen as believing that we think only with concepts. I argue against both conceptualist renditions. I confront the ontological conceptualist view with Leibniz’s metaphysics of creation. If the ontological conceptualist interpretation (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Michael K. Shim (2005). The Duality of Non-Conceptual Content in Husserl's Phenomenology of Perception. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 4 (2):209-229.
    Recently, a number of epistemologists have argued that there are no non-conceptual elements in representational content. On their view, the only sort of non-conceptual elements are components of sub-personal organic hardware that, because they enjoy no veridical role, must be construed epistemologically irrelevant. By reviewing a 35-year-old debate initiated by Dagfinn F.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Michael K. Shim (2005). The Paradox of Subjectivity. Husserl Studies 21 (2):139-144.
  8. Michael K. Shim (2005). What Kind of Idealist Was Leibniz? British Journal for the History of Philosophy 13 (1):91 – 110.
    I argue Leibniz could not have been a dualist since his notion of matter is not defined by extension but by mentalistic "primitive passive force." So Leibniz was some kind of idealist. However, Leibniz was neither a phenomenal idealist like Berkeley nor a conceptualist idealist like Hegel. Instead, despite some suggestions in favor of the latter kind of idealism, Leibniz must be regarded as an idealist who admitted extraconceptual considerations irreducible to materialism.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Michael K. Shim (2004). Renato Cristin and Kiyoshi Sakai, Phänomenologie Und Leibniz. Husserl Studies 20 (2):161-166.
  10. Michael K. Shim (2003). Jean-Luc Marion, Being Given Reviewed By. Philosophy in Review 23 (4):262-264.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Michael K. Shim (2000). Descartes and Husserl: The Philosophical Project of Radical Beginnings (Review). Journal of the History of Philosophy 38 (4):593-595.