Husserl: Transcendental and Phenomenological Reduction

Traditionally, phenomenology has understood the self in light of intentionality and hence the world. However, contemporary French phenomenology—as represented here by Jean-Luc Marion—contends that this view of subjectivity is open to challenge: our mode of existence is not simply one of “being-in the-world.” I develop this claim by examining Marion’s reformulation of the reduction. Here, the phenomenon of vanity is key. I first present Husserl’s and Heidegger’s own formulations of the reduction. Following Marion, I show that the blow of vanity (...) neutralizes both, by undercutting the respective questions to which they respond. For, in response to vanity’s own question—“What’s the use?”—neither the transcendental nor ontological reductions have a reply. Vanity consequently renders the Heideggerian distinction between authenticity and inauthenticity existentially moot. To establish this, I evaluate how existing interpretations of authenticity overlook the phenomenon of vanity. Phenomenology, I urge in conclusion, should shift its attention to the horizons opened by Marion’s erotic reduction. (shrink)

Is there intentionality in the inner most level of the soul? Do we have experience of what is unconscious? And, supposing that such an experience might exist, is it possible to perform reduction on it? In this regard the present paper aims to investigate, from a phenomenological point of view, the process of “raising awareness” of what is unconscious, trying to understand if there is a connection between this process and the methodological concept of “reduction” developed by Husserl. Particular attention (...) is paid to the specific type of reduction called “psychological reduction,” which, according to Husserl, provides access to the pure soul, the pure field of psychological experience. (shrink)

Derrida’s thought on “trace,” “différance,” “writing,” and “supplement” is always thought the breaking of logocentrism, the essence, the positive meaning, and the closure of the metaphysics of presence; this thinking is accordingly regarded the thinking with the fundamental structure of difference and openness. By tracking back to Saussure, Husserl and Levinas, this fundamental difference breaks the myth of ideal meaning as well as the illusion of the absolute open; its lack of ideality and absoluteness contains the fundamental difference within itself (...) and thus has the structure of open. However, from a broader perspective, I will re-ask the question “Whether or not Derrida’s ‘trace,’ ‘différance,’ ‘writing,’ and ‘supplement’ have a structure of open.” When the web of differences encompasses everything even its own “exit,” this “open” thus conceals and denies other modes of thinking. With the impossibility of going out of this mode of thinking, the structure of différance is closed. (shrink)

The issue of whether the phenomenology presented in Ideen I was a metaphysical realism or an idealism came to the fore almost immediately upon its publication. The present essay is an examination of the relation of Gustav Shpet, one of Husserl’s students from the Göttingen years, to this issue via his understanding of phenomenology and, particularly, of the phenomenological reduction, as shown principally in his early published writings. For Shpet, phenomenology employs essential intuition without regard to experiential intuition. If we (...) look on transcendental idealism as the label for this methodology, which disregards but does not deny either the empirical or its correlative species of intuition, then Shpet was such an idealist, all the while adhering to a metaphysical realism. In this way, Shpet could proclaim phenomenology to be the fundamental philosophical discipline without precluding the possibility of other philosophical disciplines insofar as they were conducted in relation to consciousness taken not as the “possession” of a human individual, but eidetically and thus not a “possession.”. (shrink)

Gallagher hardly refers to the central issue of the phenomenological reduction, and he perpetuates the historical blunder of Chisholm, misinterpreting Husserlian intentionality as linguistic intensionality. This misunderstanding opens the way to a “naturalization” of phenomenology, which misses the very method of the phenomenological reduction as well as the essential dimension of subjective lived experience.

In this paper, relying mainly on his "Preface for Germans" I describe Ortega's complaints about Husserl's transcendental reduction, his own "anti-idealistic" approach to phenomenology, and his alternative version of the reduction, a reduction to life. Similarities with the work of Michel Henry are noted, but not explored in detail. Mention is made of Graham Harmon's interpretation of Ortega in "Guerrilla Metaphysics," but only to set up my interpretation of Ortega.

In my paper I discuss Husserl’s standpoint on the existence of world. Addressing this issue the philosopher thinks of the kind of being, outer of consciousness, which is realized in the general thesis of natural attitude. The aim of phenomenological research is to reveal correlation of consciousness and the world, which according to Husserl, becomes transcendental constitution. In the course of explaining this correlation Husserl reveals that the existence of world might be recognized as a correlate of the general thesis (...) of natural attitude, which after phenomenological reduction becomes recognised as the constitutive achievement of consciousness. Transcendental idealism is interpreted in the paper as transcendental monism. Husserl not only questions the possibility of non-cognizable things-in-themselves, but also he uses some broad concept of transcendental subjectivity. The transcendental subjectivity is not opposed to the world, but it includes the world as the subjectivity’s correlate. Strictly speaking, the world is conceived as structure transcendental subjectivity, and the natural attitude might be taken as anonymous modus of transcendental life. (shrink)

The paper addresses the relation between transcendental-phenomenological reduction and neutral modification in Edmund Husserl’s phenomenology. According to Husserl, there is both essential kinship and fundamental difference between them. What makes them akin is that they both are characterised as disconnection or bracketing judgement about natural world. What differs them, however, is that neutral modification is a kind of transformation of conviction of existence of the world into neutral consciousness, which does not constitute the world, whereas the transcendental-phenomenological reduction disconnects the (...) world in a way which leads to uncovering the subjectivity that does constitute the world. Hence, the transcendental-phenomenological disconnection of the world does not mean its neutralisation, but rather recognition of being of the world as a result of constitutive performances of transcendental subjectivity. (shrink)

In the paper I present the Husserl’s idea of philosophy as a strict science which he understood as universal and ultimately justified knowledge, free from any prejudices coming from naturalistic attitude. The prejudice of such an attitude is a thesis of the existence of the world. By complying with this thesis unreflectively, one becomes immersed in the world, which means that in the natural attitude the transcendental character of subjectivity remains unconscious and anonymous. This anonymity might be razed by transcendental (...) reduction, which aims at getting the transcendental ego rid of self-forgetting. The subjectivity revealed this way is still, in its deepest aspects, anonymous as ultimately functioning ego, for being an epistemological absolute, it is a source of reflection and through reflection it cannot become acknowledged. I discuss some difficulties related to the second type of anonymity in relation to Husserl’s demand of phenomenology realising the idea of philosophy as strict a science. (shrink)

The paper discusses phenomenological reduction as the transformation of ego. Possibility of overcoming natural-objective attitudes leading to revealing of what is the first from which everything that is immediately given takes its sense, is what Husserl calls phenomenological reduction. This overcoming, which causes a movement from natural attitude to more primal orientation in the genetic sense, reveals the transcendental aspect of ego. Acknowledging the primacy of ego over other spheres of being, Husserl rehabilitates the value of subjectivity as transcendental sphere. (...) For it shows that from transcendental point of view it is something more than the change of attitude. Exclusion from the world with reduction leads to revealing its transcendental reverse seen from the perspective of the transformed ego, the ego which acknowledges its constitutive life. With the change in the attitude the peculiar transformation change of ego follows, so that ego in the transcendental-phenomenological attitude becomes unprejudiced spectator of their own intentional life. (shrink)

The paper presents Husserl’s conception of the transcendental reduction taken as a mode of revealing those constitutive achievements of consciousness which were covered in the natural attitude. This aspect of Husserl’s writings was pointed out by Ludwig Landgrebe, Paul Janssen and Shigeru Taguchi. Taking their works into account, the author focuses on reduction in terms of excluding the thesis of natural attitude. To exclude this thesis it is first of all necessary to reveal it and recognize as a thesis, for (...) in natural attitude it is fulfilled anonymously and remains covered. Reduction of the thesis of natural attitude leads to its reflective revealing, that is refraining from its anonymous, mindless fulfilment. It is through revealing the thesis, taken as an experience of consciousness, that we recognize that the reality needs to be understood as a correlate of the thesis, and ultimately: correlate of subjectivity which works as fulfilling the thesis. Hence, anonymously fulfilled in natural attitude, the thesis on the world’s existence is recognized, thanks to the reduction, as a constitutive achievement of consciousness. (shrink)

This book fills an important gap in previous Husserl scholarship by focusing on intersubjectivity and empathy (i.e., the experience of others as other subjects) and by addressing the related issues of validity, the degrees of evidence with which something can be experienced, and the different senses of 'objective' in Husserl's texts. Despite accusations by commentators that Husserl's is a solipsistic philosophy and that the epistemologies in Husserl's late and early works are contradictory, Hermberg shows that empathy, and thus other subjects, (...) are related to one's knowledge on the view offered in each of Husserl's Introductions to Phenomenology. Empathy is significantly related to knowledge in at least two ways, and Husserl's epistemology might, consequently, be called a social epistemology: (a) empathy helps to give evidence for validity and thus to solidify one's knowledge, and (b) it helps to broaden one's knowledge by giving access to what others have known. These roles of empathy are not at odds with one another; rather, both are at play in each of the Introductions (if even only implicitly) and, given his position in the earlier work, Husserl needed to expand the role of empathy as he did. Such a reliance on empathy, however, calls into question whether Husserl's is a transcendental philosophy in the sense Husserl claimed. (shrink)

The article presents the transcendental reduction as a type of questioning, and by so doing formulates the problem of the structure and motivation of reduction. Transcendental questioning is presented as a permanent formulation and reformulation of questions, which, it is argued, make it possible to overcome the naïveté of the natural attitude. However, the phenomenologist does not overcome naïveté in the sense of excluding it; instead, he is conscious of it. It is argued that one should understand transcendental questioning as (...) a practical activity that makes the phenomenologist responsible for knowledge by leading toward the essence, which seems to be “unquestionable.”. (shrink)

This study focuses on the essential difference between Kant’s and Husserl’s transcendental Idealism. In fact, Husserl describes in the «Cartesian Meditations» his own ontological thesis as a «transcendental idealism», in which all sorts of entities have to be constituted by an activity of the transcendental subjectivity, so that we have to regard pure consciousness as the ontological origin of all entities in the world. But this study is interested in the two opposite signications of the Kantian copernican inversion. On the (...) one hand, the Copernican inversion has the same sense as the phenomenological reduction, which implies that Husserl can’t agree with Kant’s presupposition of absolute things in themselves; on the second hand, it involves a relativistic and anthropologistic orientation, so that the aprioristic structures of given objects are founded on the universal structures of finite subjectivity, on pure forms and faculties of human consciousness. At the opposite, Husserl enounces a methodological prescription for any phenomenological elucidation: it is not allowed to presuppose in phenomenology any given faculty or given nature of transcendental subjectivity. This prescription has important consequences on which this study focuses. First the ontological difference between intuitus originarius and intuitus derivatus, in nite and nite type of intuition, doesn’t have any validity: the difference between factual and rational truths only depends on the essence of the truth itself, and doesn’t have its foundation on the ontological difference between creative and receptive sort of intuition. Secondly, this first thesis admits an immediate application on the level of subjective constitution of objects: the modality in which an object appears to the subjectivity doesn’t depend on the universal structure of finite subject, but is exclusively founded on the essence of the object itself, so that it is impossible to consider the aprioristic constitutive structure as a merely subjective structure. Thirdly, in this transcendental phenomenology everything has to be constituted by subjectivity: the aprioristic character of the pure forms of sensibility is not founded on the structure of finite subjectivity, but rather on the essential connection between sensual material and form; so that it is not allowed to presuppose any facticity of time and space; the pure forms of sensibility have to be constituted by a special type of synthesis that we have to elucidate in opposition to other types of higher levels. The profound signication of Husserl’s anticopernican inversion is that the field of transcendental phenomenology consists of the essential form of an eidos ego, which is «more objective than any objectivity», as Levinas said; and that transcendental phenomenology is completely dominated by the principium reddendae rationis. (shrink)

By extending Husserl’s own historico-critical study to include the conceptual mathematics of more contemporary times – specifically category theory and its emphatic development since the second half of the 20th century – this paper claims that the delineation between mathematics and philosophy must be completely revisited. It will be contended that Husserl’s phenomenological work was very much influenced by the discoveries and limitations of the formal mathematics being developed at Göttingen during his tenure there and that, subsequently, the rôle he (...) envisaged for his material a priori science is heavily dependent upon his conception of the definite manifold. Motivating these contentions is the idea of a mathematics which would go beyond the constraints of formal ontology and subsequently achieve coherence with the full sense of transcendental phenomenology. While this final point will be by no means proven within the confines of this paper it is hoped that the very fact of opening up for the possibility of such an idea will act as a supporting argument to the overriding thesis that the relationship between mathematics and phenomenology must be problematised. (shrink)

The first phase of Sartre’s philosophical publications is marked by an apparent ambivalence towards Husserl’s transcendental turn. Sartre accepts both major aspects of that turn, the phenomenological reduction and the use of transcendental argumentation. Yet his rejection of the transcendental ego that Husserl derives from this transcendental turn overlooks an obvious transcendental argument in favour of it. His books on emotion and imagination, moreover, make only very brief comments about the transcendental constitution of the world of experience. In each case, (...) these appear at the end of the book and can seem to contradict the book’s central analysis. The problem underlying these features of his works of phenomenological psychology is clarified and resolved, however, when Sartre articulates his own transcendental phenomenology and ontology in Being and Nothingness a decade after he first encountered the work of Husserl. This resolution raises a new problem that animates the next phase of his philosophy. (shrink)

In this paper I will examine Husserl’s attempt to establish a ground for science with the so called transcendental reduction. This will entail both an identification of the problems that Husserl was attempting to solve as well as a careful analysis of Husserl’s account of his methodology. I will then examine how Derrida’s reading, which affirms the phenomenological project in many of its essential aspects, begins to signal a subtle yet ultimately radical disagreement. This disagreement will have lasting implications for (...) our understanding of the possibilities designated by the transcendental method in Husserl’s thinking. (shrink)

The present work is a systematic study of the nexus which holds together perception, motivation and existence in Husserl’s early writings—precisely those which are dated between 1898 and 1921. In Chapter I a historical and conceptual reconstruction of the genesis of what is termed ‘constitution problem’ is provided. After a thorough discussion about the distinction between real and intentional description, we elucidate the method of phenomenological reduction and show how the constitution problem relates to questions regarding transcendence and existence. Chapter (...) II is concerned with a detailed presentation of Husserlian phenomenology of visual perception. We present Husserl’s theory of intentionality in the light of Husserlian mereology: first, we argue that Husserl conceives of intentionality as a property which entails a relation; secondly, we debate his critique of the theory of immanent objects and his solution to the problem of non-existent objects. After examining the perceptual act in all its essential components (i.e. quality, matter and sensations), we discuss the notorious ‘content – apprehension’ schema and study the manuscripts in which Husserl develops the notion of ‘perceptional’. Themes like the relationship between fulfillment and disappointment and the distinguishability of veridical and non-veridical perceptions are also taken into account. In Chapter III we consider what differentiates the outer perception from other kinds of perception. After making clear what Husserl means by ‘inner perception’ we debate the opposition between immanent and transcendent perception, first by using identity/manifold analysis and then by means of whole/part analysis. In this context we reject Husserl’s account of reflection as a perceptual act on both exegetical and theoretical grounds. Furthermore, we explain how Husserl tries to refute the ‘image theory’ and how he addresses the issue of the hidden profiles. The study of the microstructure of the outer perception allows us to explain in which sense this kind of perception is to be conceived as necessarily inadequate. Chapter IV is largely devoted to an attempt at systematizing Husserl’s theory of kinaesthesia as it appears in the Dingvorlesung. This sheds light on the structure of motivation and on the role which this latter plays in the constitution of a mundane object. In Chapter V we scrutinize Husserl’s conception of the possibility/reality dichotomy. In particular, we distinguish an ontological analysis of possibility from a phenomenological one and investigate the diverse concepts of ‘possibility’ (e.g. ideal, real, independent, modal) developed by Husserl. Finally, we introduce and debate Husserl’s (so-called) ‘exhibition principle’ and try to point out its ambiguities. (shrink)

In his illuminating Aquinas Lecture Jacques Taminiaux offers a bold interpretation of certain contemporary European philosophers in terms of the way in which they react to and transform Husserl’s phenomenological reduction. He highlights issues relating to embodiment, personhood, and value. Taminiaux sketches Husserl’s emerging conception of the reduction and criticizes certain Cartesian assumptions that Husserl retains even after the reduction, and specifically the assumption that directly experienced mental acts and states are not given in adumbrations but present themselves as they (...) are. Heidegger too does not escape a certain Cartesian dualism with his privileging of the individual authentic self over and against the inauthentic das Man. Taminiaux portrayspost-Heideggerian philosophy as responding to failures or dualisms haunting Husserl’s reduction. Taminiaux is right to insist on the importance of the reduction in Husserl and also, despite appearances, in Heidegger, but it is not clear that the meditations of Arendt, Jonas, and Levinas can really be seen as responding to failures in the reduction. Furthermore, Taminiaux downplays the centrality of Husserl’s commitment to transcendental idealism and his representation of the epochē and reduction as ways of breaking through the natural attitude to reach the transcendental attitude of the non-participating spectator. (shrink)

The following issues are considered in the paper: The proper understanding of the ‘attempt to doubt’ recommended by Husserl in Ideas, Book I, as a point of departure on a way to the transcendental reduction. How intentional reference of an act of consciousness is possible and what it consists in, according to Husserl. A logical dependence between the characteristics of intentional reference and the standpoint of transcendental idealism in Husserl’s Ideas, Book I. How to understand Husserl’s claim that the intentional (...) object is equivalent to sense. I arrive at the conclusion that a fully consistent interpretation of Husserl’s declarations regarding the aforementioned issues does not seem to be possible; for one needs to modify Husserl’s standpoint in certain respects. These considerations will be carried on in an article titled ‘The Noema as Sense. The Problem of the Object of Consciousness in Husserl’s Transcendental Idealism’, forthcoming in Diametros. (shrink)

Investigo la relación filosófica entre Avenarius y Husserl en los años del curso Problemas fundamentales de la fenomenología en relación especial con el concepto natural de mundo. Primero, expongo brevemente los temas fenomenológicos fundamentales: el concepto natural de mundo, la reducción fenomenológica y la unidad del yo. En segundo lugar, sintetizo las ideas básicas de la obra Der menschliche Weltbegriff de Avenarius. En tercer lugar, discuto la coincidencia entre Avenarius y Husserl, poniendo énfasis en la reducción primordial, y planteo las (...) críticas de Husserl a Avenarius, destacando la postura unívoca de Avenarius en contraste con la postura fenomenológica de Husserl. I study the philosophical relationship between Avenarius and Husserl during the years where the later held the lectures The Basic Problems of Phenomenology, taking especially into account the natural concept of the world. First, I expound briefly the basic phenomenological topics of the lectures: the natural concept of the world, the phenomenological reduction and the ego's unity. Second, I tackle the basic ideas of Avenarius' Der menschliche Weltbegriff . Third, I discuss the coincidence between Avenarius and Husserl, paying special attention to the primordial reduction, and also the objections that Husserl made to Avenarius, making a contrast between Avenarius' univocal approach to being and Husserl's phenomenological account. (shrink)

When Edmund Husserl retired in 1928, ceding his chair at the University of Freiburg to his successor Martin Heidegger, he again began working intensively on synthesizing his philosophical efforts into a new “system of phenomenology.” This new presentation could, hopefully, displace his earlier presentation of 1913 in the Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy, Book I, a work with which he had become dissatisfied in the meantime.

How can phenomenology describe an object as "the political"? The article endeavours to show how it is possible to apprehend such a theme from a _transcendental<D> perspective. After going through the methodic difficulties of the Cartesian way, which involves an egology intersubjectively extended to the monadology, the essay analyzes the non-Cartesian ways. Indeed, both of them pave the way for a political based on a plural structure. The way through the life-world as well as the way through psychology succeed in (...) depicting the political, either as living sociality or as the play between ethical co-attitudes. In each case, the reduction operates in a specific manner, either as a pure Cartesian bracketing, as a retrocession to social originality or as a nonparticipating in the world-interests. Nevertheless, only the way through psychology reaches the political at a strict transcendental level, whereas the way through the life-world always runs the risk of falling back. (shrink)

This paper, after a brief historical introduction about the author analyses some features of phenomenological anthropology of Gerda Walther, taking especially into account his main work, Phenomenology of the Mystical, from the second edition of 1955 (trad. ital., 2008). In it, Walther presents a real treaty of the philosophical anthropology, as part of a preliminary analysis of the mystical phenomena to relate anthropological elements from a phenomenological analysis of the human being and the philosophical-religious problems of mystical experience and paranormal (...) experiences. In this work identifies, in addition to the influence of the Husserl’s method, the influx of Pfänder’s phenomenology, mainly in the use of metaphors to explain the formation of the human person. One of the fundamental theses of his anthropology is that every human being has an I-Center (Ichzentrum) with the features of self-consciousness and capability to will. In it, the author showed dependence of elaboration from Pfänder’s Comprehensive Psychology, but also of the phenomenology of Husserl, Scheler and Stein, in particular by its conception of “heart of me” (Einbettung des Ich) which denotes similarities with the “I-animic” of Stein, a concept derived from a review of “I-pure” of Husserl. (shrink)

This paper argues that the Husserl—Heidegger relationship is systematically misunderstood when framed in terms of a distinction between internalism and externalism. Both philosophers, it is argued, employ the phenomenological reduction to immanence as a fundamental methodological instrument. After first outlining the assumptions regarding inner and outer and the individual and the social from which recent epistemological interpretations of phenomenology begin, I turn to the question of Husserl's internalism. I argue that Husserl can only be understood as an internalist on the (...) assumption that immanence equates with internal. This, however, is not the case as can be seen once the reduction is understood not as setting aside the existence of the world, but rather a reflection on its meaning. Turning to Heidegger, I argue that his commitment to a form of the phenomenological reduction precludes him from being either a semantic or a social externalist. The place of authenticity and the first person perspective in his work derive from his phenomenological commitments, which can be seen in his accounts of discourse and language and of falling (Verfallen). I then go on to briefly outline a more plausible basis for understanding the difference between Husserl's and Heidegger's phenomenologies in terms of their respective emphases on logic and on poetics. (shrink)

In the Logical Investigations Husserl announced a critique of Lotze’s epistemology, but it was never included in the printed text. The aim of my paper is to investigate the remnant of Husserl’s planned text with special emphasis on the question of whether it goes beyond the obvious aspects of Husserl’s indebtedness to Lotze. Using Husserl’s student notes, excerpts, and book annotations, I refine the dating of Husserl’s encounter with Lotze and separate the various layers of influence. I argue that Husserl’s (...) acquaintance with Lotze’s epistemology forms a separate layer of influence, and that this layer cannot antedate the middle of the decade before the Logical Investigation. Husserl’s investigation of Lotze’s epistemology constitutes the most interesting aspect of the unpublished text that underlies the missing chapter from the Logical Investigations. I show that the most relevant influence of Lotze’s epistemology on Husserl lies in Lotze’s idea of the formal and real significance of logical laws. Although Husserl negatively evaluated Lotze’s epistemological problem both in the planned chapter and in other printed parts of the Logical Investigations, the problem repeatedly surfaced during Husserl’s Göttingen period. Finally, I use an unpublished student transcript to reconstruct Husserl’s SS 1912 seminar on Lotze’s epistemology. I argue that the deeper dimension of Lotze’s epistemological problem (and Husserl’s rejection of it) lies in the way that it highlights the epistemological function of phenomenology. (shrink)

Within the phenomenological perspective the reductive method, as proceeding through the path (µετα-οδός), allows the subject to refer to its own living structure. It is crucial to bring outthe aware character of this relationship, because such consciousness is achieved by an unawaresubjectivity. Since the subject arises ab initio in a hyletic-temporal field, it has to carry out itsmethodological procedure according to definite modes, that is the time-consciousness’ modes. The method of reduction, which aims to uncover what is not thematic, constitutes (...) the radicalaction, which permits the subject to represent the way of being of its inner structure. In thissense, the reduction is the highest act of representation ( Vergegenwärtigung ), because its proce-dure takes place by a thematizing return of the subject to itself. To carry out the reductivemethod, i.e. to perform a self-unveiling, the subject has to follow the patterns of a pre-existentlife, which are already temporal and to which it always is related. Though the reduction is afree choice of a subject, it has to conform to a prescribed procedure. (shrink)

L'article se propose de situer l'œuvre de Merleau-Ponty dans l'histoire de la phénoménologie et d'en marquer l'originalité. A cette fin, la position de Merleau-Ponty est explicitement comparée à celle de Husserl et à celle de Sartre. Dans le premier cas, il s'agit avant tout de préciser exactement la nature et la portée de la réduction phénoménologique et, particulièrement, de comprendre ce que la phénoménologie nomme la réduction au monde naturel. Dans le second cas, il s'agit de montrer que l'œuvre phénoménologique (...) de Sartre, en dépit de ses mérites réels, est contaminée et entravée par des présupposés ontologiques qui n'ont rien à voir avec la phénoménologie et dont l'œuvre de Merleau-Ponty est indemne. (shrink)