Merleau-Ponty and the Order of the Earth

Research in Phenomenology 46 (1):54-69 (2016)


_ Source: _Volume 46, Issue 1, pp 54 - 69 In this essay, I reconstruct Merleau-Ponty’s implicit critique of Husserl in his lectures on Husserl’s concept of the earth as _Boden_ or ground. Against Husserl, Merleau-Ponty regards the earth seen as pure _Boden_ as an idealization. He emphasizes the ontological necessity for the earth as _Boden_ to always hypostasize itself into the Copernican concept of earth as object. In turn, Merleau-Ponty builds this necessity into an essential feature of being, allowing himself to retrieve ontology itself from its status as external to being, and to make room for it within the structure of being: ontology is one of the ways in which experiences become objectified, thereby allowing being to achieve its essential movement of hypostatization.

Download options


    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,722

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library


Added to PP

76 (#155,431)

6 months
4 (#163,019)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Seeing Things in Merleau-Ponty.Sean D. Kelly - 2005 - In Taylor Carman (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Merleau-Ponty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 74-110.
Merleau-Ponty on Husserl: A Reappraisal.Dan Zahavi - 2002 - In Ted Toadvine & Lester E. Embree (eds.). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Image and Ontology in Merleau-Ponty.Trevor Perri - 2013 - Continental Philosophy Review 46 (1):75-97.
Merleau-Ponty's Concept of Depth.Anthony J. Steinbock - 1987 - Philosophy Today 31 (4):336-351.
Intrascendibilità dell’esperienza e atteggiamento naturale in Merleau-Ponty.Rocco Sacconaghi - 2011 - ACME: Annali della Facoltà di lettere e filosofia dell'Università degli studi di Milano 64 (3):165-182.