The Idea of Rigorous Science in Husserl’s Phenomenology and Its Relevance for the other Sciences

In Mihai-Dan Chiţoiu & Ioan-Alexandru Tofan (eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference “Humanities and Social Sciences Today. Classical and Contemporary Issues” – Philosophy and Other Humanities. Pro Universitaria. pp. 141-156 (2015)

Authors
Victor Gelan
University of Bucharest
Abstract
In this paper I intend to grapple with the idea of philosophy as rigorous science from the point of view of Husserl‟s phenomenology in order to show that this idea may have an important contribution to the way in which the scientific character of sciences in general, and of human and social sciences in particular, is being conceived. As rigorous science, phenomenology emphasizes and investigates the a priori context of other sciences. In this way, it plays a vital role in the development of every particular eidetic upon which any sciences rely. This eidetic (or the eidetic layer of any mature science) embraces the goal and strives to reach the objective of determining the valid sense of the fundamental notions used by the scientist in his research, without, nevertheless, stirring a radical questioning of this sense and of the ultimate validity of these notions. To define them requires passing from the usual level of inquiring of that particular science (the processes of dealing with facts and experiments) to the level (or meta-level) of a radical reflection on the sense or the meaning of the basic notions of the science in question (its own foundations). Philosophy as rigorous science connects the researcher´s assertions not only to the empirical state of affairs envisaged by his work, but, moreover and in a fundamental way, to their noematic content, to their intrinsic intentional meaning. Therefore, the idea of rigorous science elaborated in Husserl‟s phenomenology is heavy with the potential of clarifying the foundations and stakes of the research undertaken by the other sciences.
Keywords naturalism  historicism  rigorous science  human sciences  social sciences  phenomenology  epistemology of science  possibility of knowledge
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Are Rigorous Evolutionary Histories of Human Mating Possible?Harmon R. Holcomb - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):606-607.
Phenomenology.Amedeo Giorgi - 2011 - Schutzian Research 3:35-49.
Naturalizing What? Varieties of Naturalism and Transcendental Phenomenology.Maxwell J. D. Ramstead - 2015 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 14 (4):929-971.
Why Did Husserl Not Become the Galileo of the Science of Consciousness?Andrzej Klawiter - 2004 - Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 82 (1):253-271.
Husserl, Weber, Freud, and the Method of the Human Sciences.Donald McIntosh - 1997 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 27 (3):328-353.
Eidetic Results in Transcendental Phenomenology: Against Naturalization.Richard Tieszen - 2016 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 15 (4):489-515.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-10-22

Total views
1,523 ( #1,192 of 2,253,661 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
291 ( #1,245 of 2,253,661 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature