Notes
pp. 241–242. All translations of passages from Taguchi’s book are mine. (I am painfully aware of the difficulties and dangers of attempting such translation when neither language is my mother tongue, but I hope to get the general drift right, if not the precise sense.)
I elaborate these points much more fully in Overgaard 2007, especially chapter 5.
On the basis of his book’s fascinating finale, I think Taguchi could mount a highly interesting Husserlian reply to the Levinasian critique defended e.g., in Drabinski 2001.
My translation; the same goes for the next quote.
I am grateful to Sebastian Luft for his comments on a previous draft of this review.
References
Drabinski, J. E. (2001). Sensibility and singularity: The problem of phenomenology in Levinas. Albany: SUNY Press.
Husserl, E. (1969). Formal and transcendental logic (D. Cairns, Trans.). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Overgaard, S. (2007). Wittgenstein and other minds: Rethinking subjectivity and intersubjectivity with Wittgenstein, Levinas, and Husserl. New York and London: Routledge.
Theunissen, M. (1977). Der Andere: Studien zur Sozialontologie der Gegenwart (2nd ed.). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Waldenfels, B. (1971). Das Zwischenreich des Dialogs: Sozialphilosophische Untersuchungen in Anschluss an Edmund Husserl. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Yamaguchi, I. (1982). Passive Synthesis und Intersubjektivität bei Edmund Husserl. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Zahavi, D. (1996). Husserl und die transzendentale Intersubjektivität: Eine Antwort auf die sprachpragmatische Kritik. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Overgaard, S. S. Taguchi, Das Problem des ‘Ur-Ich’ bei Edmund Husserl: Die Frage nach der selbstverständlichen ‘Nähe’ des Selbst . Husserl Stud 25, 89–95 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10743-008-9048-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10743-008-9048-0