Husserl: Cartesian Meditations

It is said that transcendental phenomenology faces an unavoidable aporia, according to which it is perfectly justified to accept the claim that the transcendental ego constitutes the sense of all external being, including other subjects, as well as the claim that other subjects constitute the sense of all external objects, since they are a community of transcendental egos. The essence of the aporia is that it is impossible to accept both of these claims if one accepts the conceptual schema of (...) transcendental phenomenology. In the article, I present an interpretation of transcendental phenomenology which allows one to avoid such consequences. Firstly, the static theory of intersubjectivity presented in Ideas of Pure Phenomenology and Carthesian Meditations is reconstructed and analyzed. Attention is devoted to the issues of phenomenological reduction and constitution of sense. Afterwards, it is argued that one should distinguish two kinds of constitutive processes: one understood as an activity of the sole transcendental ego (self), and the second one as an activity of the community of transcendental egos. It is claimed that both processes are mutually connected. Moreover, it seems that the second kind of constitution is metaphysically prior then the former one. This claim will allow one to overcome solipsistic interpretations of transcendental phenomenology and to overcome the aporia presented. (shrink)

The main goal of the present paper is to offer a preliminary study of the relations between phenomenology and metaphysics in Husserl. After a brief presentation of what Husserl means by the term “metaphysics”, the rest of our research will consist of a detailed commentary on §60 of the Cartesian Meditations. Our aim is to explain in what sense, according to Husserl, the “outcomes” of the phenomenological constitution of monadological intersubjectivity entail the solution to a traditional metaphysical problem, i.e., that (...) of the existence of just one real world. The present investigation does not pretend to be more than an introduction. Besides shedding some light on a specific text, it will pave the way for a future inquiry into the relations between phenomenology and metaphysics in Husserl. (shrink)

The paper offers a parallel exposition of Ricœur and Patočka in the narrow context of their respective reading of Husserl’s Fifth Cartesian Meditation. At the same time, it follows a broader goal, namely to confront a hermeneutics of the self with a phenomenology freed of subjectivism. Ricœur claims that phenomenology presupposes interpretation. Under this assumption, even the paradox of intersubjectivity in the 5th CM can be restated as an interpretation of the self/other difference. Patočka in his interpretations of the 5th (...) CM drew on his own observations regarding embodiment and a possible self-awareness of the bodily subject. He claims that the first form of explicit self-reflection is made possible through the other. It is against the background of this claim that he gives his original reading of the “appresentation” of the other as leading to the appresentation of myself in the other. At the end, the paper localizes the point in which Ricœur’s hermeneutics of the self and Patočka’s non-subjectivist phenomenology part ways: it is the possibility of the self to be oneself. While the emphasis in Ricœur and his hermeneutics of the multiplied forms of alterity is put on being oneself as another, in Patočka it is through another that being oneself is possible. (shrink)

This paper aims at discussing a quite specific aspect of Husserl’s phenomenology, i.e., the notion of synthesis of identification, and the role it plays in the arguments set forward in the Fifth Cartesian Meditation during the discussion of the constitution of the other, hence of the monadological inter-subjectivity. The case will be made for considering the very heart of the Meditation to be what we will refer to as Husserl’s “transcendental argument”, consisting in the claim that there can be only (...) one inter-subjectivity, hence, the “world” being the correlate of the transcendental monadological inter-subjectivity, only one real and actual world. This will also give us the opportunity to critically approach a series of views lately held by some leading figures of the “continental” and “analytic” tradition, which, as the first part of the essay will show, pursue views directly opposed to Husserl’s. (shrink)

In spite of making explicit their phenomenological influence, Ricœur and Patočka have been very critical with husserlian idealism. In that sense, although we can consider those remarks as “heresies” to Husserl’s thought, they evidence their belonging to the phenomenological tradition. Following this trail, in this article, we ask the question: How to characterize the phenomenological conceptions of Ricœur and Patočka despite of their common critique of husserlian idealism? To answer this question, we analyze their respective commentaries to Husserl’s Cartesians Meditations. (...) In this “sacred” book of the phenomenology of intersubjectivity, both of them find a reconstruction of phenomenological idealism in the concept of methodical solipsism, and they find the introduction of the concept of alter ego in the last Meditation as an insufficient escape. We will show that the meaning of their critiques has to be understood in relation with their own trajectories where they converge in defending a particular conception of phenomenology. This conception implies a critical reflection of its own task and the renewal of its autonomous care for the phenomena. (shrink)

Resumen Husserl emprendió varias presentaciones sintéticas de la fenomenología con el propósito de darla a conocer ante públicos amplios. En el presente trabajo estudiaremos el enfoque de las Conferencias de París, su proyección en las Meditaciones cartesianas y el destino del proyecto de la versión alemana en tensión con la redacción del Sistema de filosofía fenomenológica, a los efectos de establecer sus rasgos distintivos, evaluar los alcances del abandono del neocartesianismo, que suele asociarse con el último período de producción de (...) Husserl y, situar la dirección de estas últimas presentaciones en el clima intelectual que les dio origen.Husserl undertooks several synthetic presentations of phenomenology in order to make it known to broader audiences. In the present work we will study the approach of the Paris Lectures, their projection in the Cartesian Meditations and the idea of the German version in tension with the writing of the System of phenomenological philosophy, in order to establish its distinctive features, to evaluate the abandonment of neocartesianism that is usually associated with the last period of Husserl's production and to identify the direction of these presentations in the intellectual climate that gave rise to them. (shrink)

The main goal of the present paper is to offer a preliminary study of the relations between phenomenology and metaphysics in Husserl. After a brief presentation of what Husserl means by the term “metaphysics”, the rest of our research will consist of a detailed commentary on §60 of the Cartesian Meditations. Our aim is to explain in what sense, according to Husserl, the “outcomes” of the phenomenological constitution of monadological intersubjectivity entail the solution to a traditional metaphysical problem, i.e., that (...) of the existence of just one real world. The present investigation does not pretend to be more than an introduction. Besides shedding some light on a specific text, it will pave the way for a future inquiry into the relations between phenomenology and metaphysics in Husserl. (shrink)

Straipsnyje analizuojama fenomenologinë intersubjektyuvumo samprata Husserlio Karteziðkosiose meditacijose. Jose autorius tyrinëja ne konkreèias socialumo formas ar personalinio santykio að – tu subtilybes, bet atvirumo kitam prielaidas. Dëmesys sutelkiamas á konstitutyvinæ kito prasmës genezæ. Husserlis ásigilina á savasties patirtá parodydamas jos parodoksalø susvetimëjimà su savimi. Tiek savo kûno,tiek savo laiko patirtis atskleidþiama kaip reikalaujanti kitybës. Tiksliau sakant, tokia kûno ir laikopatirtis negalima kaip tapatybë su savimi. Tik patirdamas savo kûnà kaip tarpkûniðkumà, galiu atsikratyti vidujybës ir iðorybës, imanencijos ir transcendencijos prietaro. Kitybës (...) dalyvavimà esamybëjeHusserlis apraðo aprezentacijos arba implikacijos terminais, o „poravimasis“ yra svarbiausias tarpkû-niðkos jungties su kitu apibûdinimas. Kito prasmës kilmæ paaiðkina ne metafiziðkai postuluota transcendencija, bet susiporavimo su kitu patirties apraðymas.Pagrindiniai þodþiai: fenomenologija, intersubjektyvumas, kitas, gyvenamas kûnas, tarpkûniðkumas, implikacija, poravimasis. (shrink)

"Ronald Bruzina’s superb translation... makes available in English a text of singular historical and systematic importance for phenomenology." —Husserl Studies "... a pivotal document in the development of phenomenology... essential reading for students of phenomenology twentieth-century thought." —Word Trade "... an invaluable addition to the corpus of Husserl scholarship. More than simply a scholarly treatise, however, it is the result of Fink’s collaboration with Husserl during the last ten years of Husserl’s life.... This truly essential work in phenomenology should find (...) a prominent place alongside Husserl’s own works. For readers interested in phenomenology—and in Husserl in particular—it cannot be recommended highly enough." —Choice "... a thorough critique of Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology... raises many new questions.... a classic." —J. N. Mohanty A foundational text in Husserlian phenomenology, written in 1932 and now available in English for the first time. (shrink)

In this study, the author develops an original reading of the Fifth Cartesian Meditation. This text, far from giving rise to a “transcendental solipsism”, as classical commentators claim, leads to a constitution of intersubjectivity on various levels . In its center, a “phenomenological construction” operates, i.e. a methodological piece that masters the genetic approach of intersubjectivity. Closely following the “almost mathematical” rigour of this crucial text of Husserl’s phenomenology, the author equally tackles the issue of the constitution of the experience (...) of the other and the truly intersubjective structure of transcendental subjectivity. The article concludes with the metaphysical results of the analysis of the experience of the other. (shrink)

In his Fifth Meditation, Husserl appears to confront the problem of solipsism. As a number of commentators have suggested, however, since it arises from within phenomenology itself and the existence of the other is never in doubt, it is not a solipsism in the traditional Cartesian sense. Alfred Schutz, however, appears to understand Husserl's inquiry in precisely these terms. As such, his critical discussions of the Fifth Meditation, as well as his subsequent rejection of transcendantal philosophy, might not be well-founded. (...) yet in spite of this misconstrual, Schutz's criticisms do highlight the problematic relationship between subjectivity and intersubjectivity in Husserl's late phenomenology, and albeit misplaced, ironically, his rejection of the Fifth Meditation forms a coherent response to Husserl's call for a science of the life-world. intersubjecitivy, Schutz concludes, must be assumed as a basis for phenomenological investigation rather than derived as a result of philosophical inquiry. Negatively, this is clearly a departure from Husserl's project since Schutz inevitably negates the radical motif under which phenomenological inquiry ostensibly proceeds. Positively, however, the project to which this criticism leads - a phenomenology of the natural attitude - represents a legitimate direction for phenomenological study as well as a radical turn within the thoery and pratice of social science. (shrink)

This dissertation explores the description of the experience of the alien other person that Edmund Husserl offers in the Cartesian Meditations and presents its three major implications: that the description reveals the transcendental ego to arise as a response to an always already embodied experience; that eidetic intuition and variation is possible only as an activity that involves actual and possible others, even in the self-variation needed to achieve the eidos ego; and that transcendental phenomenology is an inherently ethical endeavor. (...) These three implications reveal themselves once a central Husserlian term, Deckung, which I translate as 'overlaying,' and its cognates are traced through Husserl's corpus and once the description of Fremderfahrung that Husserl offers in the Fifth Cartesian Meditation is situated with respect to his analyses of passive synthesis, judgment, and wholes and parts in other texts. One has intuition at all, and certainly intuition of other persons, only through the incorporation of distance or absence between layers of sense for which one already recognizes oneself as responsible. And this same act of incorporation is precisely what fuels ongoing phenomenological description. For it is the fact that synthesis happens through Deckung or overlaying that causes the possibility for Verdeckung and Aufdeckung or concealment and discovery. Such an entwining of synthesis and concealment, especially in the form of experiences of human conflict, produces the possibility of transcendental reduction and the recognition of the structures of transcendental intersubjectivity as ethical demands. (shrink)

The problem of the Other remains a source of conflict and confusion in phenomenology. Edmund Husserl's project for a phenomenology which functions as a transcendental philosophy has been persistently haunted by the suspicion that his methodological commitment to the conscious life of the transcendental ego confines his procedure to the immanent processes of a solus ipse and thus prevents transcendental phenomenology from presenting a legitimate account of the objective world as an intersubjectively available world. ;A clear presentation of what Husserl (...) is doing when he tackles the problem of the Other is lacking in Husserlian scholarship. This study seeks to fill this gap by examining Husserl's account of the intersubjectivity issue, especially in terms of the Fifth Cartesian Meditation. The result, in accord with Husserl's direction to provide a presuppositionless description of the "things themselves," is a faithful exposition of this crucial aspect of Husserl's transcendental phenomenological project. ;Once the function of inner time-consciousness in the life of the ego is correctly understood, the ego is seen as an intentional matrix transcending itself toward the world. This conception of the ego redirects the meaning of the problem of the Other. Husserl does not need to demonstrate the existence of other egos on the basis of the transcendental ego. As the ego is its intentional life, it lives with Others in an intentional relationship--the relationship which founds objective knowledge. Accordingly, what Husserl needs to do is to intentionally explicate the coming to presence of one ego for another. Via the transcendental epoche the positive givenness of empathy becomes a thing of wonder and I am able to ask about the how of this givenness, i.e., I undertake a transcendental analysis with respect to the conditions of possibility for such an experience. Three conclusions are reached: the transcendental ego is not only a legitimate phenomenological discovery but its structural dynamics show it to be an open field of intentionality transcending itself toward the Other; this transcendental field is intersubjective in nature; and Husserl's commitment to transcendental egology is a result of his phenomenological description of transcendental empathy. (shrink)

Translation and Introduction by Fred Kersten Alfred Schutz’s lecture, “The Problem of Intersubjectivity in Husserl,” was read and discussed at the Husserl-Colloquium in Royaumont on April 28, 1957. The German text of the lecture appeared in Philosophische Rundschau: Eine Vierteljahrsschrift für philosophische Kritik, edited by Hans-Georg Gadamer and Helmut Kuhn, Vol. V, 1957, pp. 81ff. A translation of the lecture by Frederick Kersten in collaboration with Professors Aron Gurwitsch and Professor Thomas Luckmann was published in Alfred Schutz, Collected Papers, Volume (...) III, edited by Ilse Schutz and an Introduction by Aron Gurwitsch. (shrink)

In his book A History of the Culture of the Modern Period, the eminent scholar Egon Friedell wrote concerning Descartes's influence in seven-teenth-century France that all the efforts of the great philosopher's critics notwithstanding, "his school inexorably extended its influence not only through the ‘occasionalists,’ as his closest disciples and followers in philosophy were called, and through the remarkable logic of the Port-Royal school The Art of Thinking and Boileau's tone-setting work The Poetic Art: rather, all of France, headed by (...) the "Sun King," who at one time had banned Descartes's works, became his school. The state, economy, theater, architecture, religious affairs, strategy, and the art of gardening all became Cartesian. Descartes reigned unrestricted, as a sovereign, in all things: in tragedy, where the passions struggled with one another; in comedy, where algebraic formulas were devised for human characters; in the area around Versailles, dominated by the abstract symmetry of gardens; in the analytic methods for waging war and running the economy; and in the so to speak deductive ritual of hairstyles and manners, dances and genteel conversation. One can even say that to this day every Frenchman is a born Cartesian.". (shrink)

As Husserl argues in the fifth Cartesian Meditation, the similarity of my Body (Leib) with the body (Körper) of another person is the founding moment of the experience of the other. This similarity is based on the previous objectivation of my Body. Husserl continuously worried to explicate this similarity-premise and by doing so, it appeared that this objectivation already presupposes intersubjectivity. By running into this problem, the Meditation actually fulfils its program by showing that the other is co-constitutive of the (...) world and more precisely of my existence as a worldly human being. At the same time he developed an alternative approach by identifying the original experience of the other as an expressive unity (Ausdruckseinheit) as the condition of possibility of intersubjective experience. By drawing on the relevant Forschungsmanuskripte in the volumes on Intersubjectivity and on Ideas II, it appears that the Meditation offers a naturalistic theory of intersubjectivity that results from the introduction of the reduction to primordiality. When one takes into account Husserl's analysis of the experience of an expressive unity, that is a defining characteristic of the personalistic attitude, one can clarify the derivative nature of this naturalistic approach. (shrink)

I will first give a brief summery of Husserl’s project in the “Fifth Meditation” and the steps in his analysis in order to evoke the context of my remarks and to also to begin to communicate my understanding of this work of Husserl’s. Then I will go more closely through the beginning steps in the analysis and develop my own points as I go along.

In seiner Fünften Cartesianischen Meditation entwickelt Husserl eine transzendentale Theorie der Fremderfahrung, der sogenannten ,,Einfühlung . Diese Theorie charakterisiert er in dieser Schrift als ,,statische Analyse . Genau besehen werden darin jedoch mehrere genetische Momente der Fremderfahrung in Betracht gezogen. In diesem Aufsatz versucht der Verfasser, zuerst aufgrund einiger nachgelassener Texte Husserls die wesentlichen Charaktere der statischen und der genetischen Methode und auch den Zusammenhang der beiden festzustellen, um dann aus der Analyse der Fünften Meditation die statischen und die genetischen (...) Momente konkret herauszuarbeiten. Aus dieser Untersuchung wird deutlich, dass die Theorie der Fremderfahrung in der Fünften Meditation als statische Analyse angesehen werden kann, insofern sie die ,,Fundierungsstruktur der Fremderfahrung klärt. Es ergibt sich aber auch, dass sie bereits in die genetische Sphäre eingetreten ist, sofern sie durch den ,,Abbau der höheren Sinnesschicht der Fremderfahrung die primordiale Eigenheitssphäre als Unterschicht freilegt, und wenn sie dann versucht, von dieser Eigenheitssphäre her die höhere Konstitution des fremden Leibes und des alter ego durch die ,,paarende Assoziation als ,,passive Genesis aufzuklären. Dieser halb-genetischen Theorie fehlt jedoch ein weiteres notwendiges Verfahren der genetischen Methode (das der Rückfrage nach der ,,Urstiftung ), das überprüfen soll, ob und wie alle zur primordialen Sphäre gehörigen Sinne (,,mein Leib , ,,mein Menschen-Ich usw.) wirklich ohne konstitutive Leistungen der auf fremde Subjektivität bezogenen Intentionalität urgestiftet werden können. Einige Stellen der Fünften Meditation weisen darauf hin, dass eine solche Urstiftung unmöglich wäre. In der Tat hat der späte Husserl seine ehemalige Konzeption, die die statische Fundierungsabfolge zugleich als notwendiges genetisches Nacheinander auffasste, revidiert. (shrink)

Interpreters generally agree that the Fifth Cartesian Meditation fails to achieve its task, but they do not agree on what that task is. In my essay, I attempt to formulate the question to which the Fifth Cartesian Meditation gives the answer. While it is usually assumed that the text poses a rather ambitious question, I suggest that the text asks, How is the Other given to me on the most basic level? The answer would be that the Other is given (...) as accessible in the mode of inaccessibility. Husserl’s failure to convey this question clearly seems rooted in ambiguities concerning the concepts of solipsism and the sphere of ownness. (shrink)

Dorion Cairns correctly interprets the preconstituted stratum of Edmund Husserl’s Fifth Cartesian Meditation to be the primordial ego and not the social world, as was thought by Alfred Schutz, who considered Husserl to be insufficiently attentive to the social world’s hold upon us. Following Cairns’s interpretation, which involves recovering and reconstructing strata that may never exist independently, one better understands how the transfer of sense animate organism involves automatic association, or somatic apprehension. This sense-transfer extends to any animate organism, not (...) just humans, and draws on extensive unreflected-upon similarities despite the distinctive fact that the other’s body is never given to oneself as is one’s own. Following Cairns’s interpretation, one can also understand the second epoché as an imaginative, reconstructive abstraction rather than as an example of failed ascesis. Consequently, Husserl appears as less intellectualized in his approach to empathy than often thought to be and more confident in the phenomenologist’s capacity to imagine and attend selectively to experience. (shrink)

I discuss Husserl’s account of intersubjectivity in the fifth Cartesian Meditation. I focus on the problem of perceived similarity. I argue that recent work in developmental psychology and neuroscience, concerning intermodal representation and the mirror neuron system, fails to constitute a naturalistic solution to the problem. This can be seen via a comparison between the Husserlian project on the one hand and Molyneux’s Question on the other.

The article considers a) husserl's adoption of a cartesian rationalistic goal of philosophy, B) his charge that descartes failed to make the transcendental turn toward the subject, And c) the divergent view of husserl and descartes on the "cogito" which determine the crucial differences in the priorities which they assign to metaphysics and epistemology within their first philosophies.

Husserl has enjoyed a revival of interest in recent years and the Cartesian Meditations is perhaps his most widely read text. The book is an introduction to Husserl's phenomenology and is based on Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy . Husserl attempts to show how Descartes discovered the "transcendental" perspective which is essential to any genuine philosophy. Until now there has never been a secondary text on this important and influential work on philosophy. This book, in conjunction with the text itself, (...) will serve as a proper introduction to Husserlian phenomenology. A.D. Smith introduces and assesses the key concepts that arise in the book in clear and engaging ways. His style is highly accessible and suitable for anyone coming to the Cartesian Meditations for the first time. (shrink)

The "Cartesian Meditations" translation is based primarily on the printed text, edited by Professor S. Strasser and published in the first volume of Husserliana ...

With the possible exception of the first volume of the Ideas, no single work published by Husserl has caused as much controversy among philosophers otherwise sympathetic to his philosophical endeavor as the 5th Cartesian Meditation. The controversy centers around the constitutive analysis of the sense "another subject," an analysis the elaborate detail of which seems out of place in the otherwise programmatic Cartesian Meditations. This analysis, which marks the first step in Husserl's account of consciousness of the other as another (...) subject, consciousness of self as a subject among other subjects, and consciousness of the world as an Objective 1 world, a world shared by a plurality of different subjects, is regarded to be a test of the philosophical status of transcendental phenomenology as such, a test Husserl seems to have failed. The present essay will examine this constitutive analysis as well as the role it plays in the argument of the 5th Meditation. As the title suggests, I shall side with Husserl's critics in that the analysis will be found to be wanting. However, the essay will not be simply critical, nor will it be a review of the various criticisms and defenses of the 5th Meditation which have appeared in the phenomenological tradition. Rather, an attempt to rethink the problem of intersubjectivity, the title that will be adopted for the problems posed by meanings founded upon the sense "another subject," will be made, and, in light of this attempt, a new approach to the constitutive analysis of the sense "another subject" will be presented. The specific thesis of this essay, viz., that a new approach to the constitutive analysis of the experience of the other as another subject is required, one different from Husserl's approach in the 5th Meditation, is based upon the rejection of Husserl's position that consciousness of the other as another subject is originally founded upon a connection made by the I between the other qua phenomenal object and itself qua phenomenal object, a connection that makes the extension of mental predicates to the other possible. The question I shall pose is this: Is the proper locus for the constitutive analysis of the sense "another subject," the analysis of the various motives and resulting intentional accomplishments in virtue of which the other presents himself as another subject, the distinction made on the level of the fully constituted, intersubjective world between the "privacy" of mental life and the "publicness" of the body? It will be argued that the attribution of mental life to the other (and to the I, for that matter) has the status of an explanation for observed phenomena the basis for the recognition of which is intersubjective (e.g., conflicts between subjects regarding their opinions of an Object, the difference between the behavior of subjects vis-a-vis that of inanimate objects, etc.), and hence that the distinction between "mind" and "body" cannot guide the analysis of the intentional situation that motivates the distinction. (shrink)

The fifth and final meditation of Edmund Hussefl's Cartesian Meditations has been the subject of a great deal of attention over the years. A number of commentators have focused on Husserl's treatment of the experience of other subjects there and the majority of them have been quite critical. What is not often remarked on, however, is that Husserl's initial intention at least in the Fifth Meditation is to address another topic, one that he evidently considers to be of even greater (...) urgency. 1 This topic comprises what Husserl calls "transcendental problems pertaining to the Objective WorM. ''2 This topic is an urgent one, he tells us, because unless such problems can be solved his phenomenology remains open to "what may seem to be a grave objection. ''. (shrink)

In his paper on transcendental intersubjectivity in Husserl, which refers mainly to the Fifth Cartesian Meditation, Schutz (1966a) marks out four stages in Husserl's argument and finds what are for him insurmountable problems in each stage. These stages are: (1) isolation of the primordial world of one's peculiar ownness by means of a further epoche; (2) apperception of the other via pairing; (3) constitution of objective, intersubjective Nature; (4) constitution of higher forms of community. Because of the problems Schutz encounters (...) in each of these stages, he concludes that Husserl's theory is unacceptable (Schutz, 1966a, p.82). Having already proved that it is unacceptable, he now explains why these problems arise in Husserl's theory. Intersubjectivity, says Schutz, is "a datum of the life-world," (1966a, p.82) not a transcendental problem. In other words, intersubjectivity must be dealt with as a problem of the life-world of the natural attitude, not a "problem of constitution which can be solved within the transcendental sphere." (Schutz, 1966a, p.82). There is no such thing as transcendental intersubjectivity, if by that is meant intersubjectivity of a plurality of transcendental egos. The role of transcendental phenomenology in the problem of intersubjectivity is to explicate within the transcendental reduction the sense: "intersubjectivity in the life-world." Husserl was diverted from this proper role of phenomenology--in his words, to "explicate the sense which this world has for us prior to all philosophy" (trans. and quoted by Schutz from "Cartesianische Meditationen, para. 62, in fine," in Schutz, 1966a, p.82)--because of the unobtrusive transformation of sense of his concept of constitution from that of explication and clarification to "creation," in the sense of providing an ontology of the lifeworld. The fact that phenomenology is in principle incapable of doing this lies behind the failure of Husserl's theory of intersubjectivity (Schutz, 1966a, pp.83-84). Unlike Schutz, I will deal with this general issue explicitly in the context of the stages in Husserl's argument and Schutz's objections. It seems to me that Husserl does remain within the sphere of clarification of sense, but to do explication and clarification of certain "senses" results inevitably in doing a kind of ontology. (shrink)