In this issue of Studies in Transcendental Philosophy five scholars enquire about the theoretical aspects of Kant’s transcendental philosophy related to the notions of subject, self-consciousness, and self-knowledge. Andrew Brook examines Kant’s views on transcendental apperception at the end of the Critical Period, focusing on Opus Postumum which contains some of Kant’s most important reflections on the subjective dimension. As is known, the self-conscious act designated by the proposition ‘I think’ is an act of (...) spontaneity, and this spontaneity is the reason that the subject calls itself an intelligence. In his article Addison Ellis examines the theoretical and practical dimension of spontaneity, calling into question the distinction between a merely ‘relative’ spontaneity and one that is ‘absolute’. Luca Forgione points to two forms of self-consciousness introduced by Kant: inner sense, based on a sensory form of self-awareness, and transcendental apperception. Through the notion of inner sense, Kant also allows for an introspective account of self-awareness; nonetheless, Kant holds an utterly sophisticated notion of basic self-consciousness provided for by the notion of transcendental apperception. Roberto Horácio de Sá Pereira’s article presents a systematic and a historical approach, linking the contemporary debate on transcendental argument to Kant’s philosophy. It addresses both Stroud’s objection and Strawson’s perspective on transcendental argument and introduces a new reconstruction of Kant’s Refutation as successful truth-directed transcendental argument. In contrast to the contemporary movement of transhumanism and its claims that creatures like us can exist independently of our bodies, Robert Hanna develops a generalist perspective on the subjective dimension, according to which all rational human creature are synthetic a priori necessarily, essentially embodied Kantian selves. I would like to thank the authors for participating in this issue and for helping to make it really special. (shrink)

Emil Lask’s transcendental philosophy is one of the first points of view that tries to evade the monistic inclinations of the transcendental philosophy. Lask sets as presupposition of the knowledge the “categorial differentiation”, a structure that is immanent to the relations between subject and object, knowledge and reality, “validity” and “existence”. This paper analyses this kind of “difference” – a “deviation ” or a “shift ” conceived beyond the contrast, in a non-oppositional way – and shows (...) that Lask is moving in a direction that anticipates “solutions” which are peculiar to the contemporary philosophy of difference. (shrink)

This study aims, first, to delimit the seemingly synonymous concepts of “phenomenon” and “appearance” and second, to trace the functions of each in Kant’s philosophy and the phenomenological tradition. The analy­sis is based on Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason and the central works of Edmund Husserl and Eugen Fink. Kant does not explicitly distinguish the two terms and only speaks about phenomena when he deals with the categorial application of reason. With Husserl, appearance is linked with the area (...) of the natural attitude while the phenomenon is absolute. Fink’s position is interesting in that it differs from the views of the main representatives of transcendental philosophy, Kant and Husserl. According to Fink, appearing is the foundation of the fact that what exists is and that appearing is being. Fink takes a different approach to the meanings of appearance as opposing the thing in itself which possesses true but unknowable being and appearance as taking place in the “relative” sphere of the natural attitude : with Fink, appearance turns out to be the condition of the existence of objects. Appearance, understood through the prism of the human being which perceives something as Vorschein, implies an inherently open world. Following Fink, I analyse these provisions and examine, first, light as the metaphysical source of cognition, second, the human being as a special kind of being, third, the pre-Socratic treatment of being and, fourth, the formation of a distinct phenomenological idiom. I come to the conclusion that the metaphysical-ontological method of phenomenological analysis of appearance proposed by Fink affords a new insight into the a priori principle and the nature of Kant’s “thing in itself” and proposes a new grounding of Husserl’s thesis which questions Kant’s agnosticism. (shrink)

This is a collection of three studies of both retrospective and prospective significance for the author s preoccupation with the philosophical problems arising out of the transcendentalist orientation. The aim of the present work is to focus on the notion of the paradoxical alliance of unity and difference of the transcendentalist ego and the human subject. To think this notion through in terms of its implications and consequences and to rethink the nature and method of philosophy, its relation (...) to language and to the sciences, is what the author means by the humanization of transcendental philosophy.The first study addresses the genesis of the problematic of humanization in Husserl s phenomenology of the life-world; the second seeks to understand the presuppositions and consequences of Heidegger s transformation of phenomenology into fundamental ontology; and the third takes up the themes explored by Husserl and Heidegger as they enter into Merleau-Ponty s thought. In the Epilogue, the author seeks to balance the logocentrism of phenomenology with the biocentrism of a philosophy of life.The late R. Sundara Rajan was Professor of Philosophy at the University of Poona, Pune, Fellow at the Indian Institute of Advanced Study, Shimla, and Senior Fellow at the Indian Council of Philosophical Research, New Delhi, India. (shrink)

This is a report of the international workshop «Transcendental Turn in Contemporary Philosophy 2: Kant’s Appearance, Its Ontological and Epistemic Status» (April 27—29, 2017, Moscow), the tasks of which was (1) to discuss the specificity of transcendental idealism, (2) to study the nature of one of Kant’s important concepts — that of appearance — within the framework of the essential conceptual triad of transcendentalism: thing in itself (Ding an sich) — appearance (Erscheinung) — representation (Vorstellung), (3) to (...) analyse the distinction between Kant’s concepts of appearance and phenomenon, and (4) to examine the concepts of appearance and phenomenon in relation to Husserl’s transcendental phenomenology. (shrink)

Special Issue, n. I, ch. 1, On the Transcendental.

Drawing on the original conception of Kant’s synthetic a priori and the relevant related developments in philosophy, this book presents a reconstruction of the intellectual history of the conception of quantity and offers an entirely ...

Kant’s transcendental philosophy of Kant is the metaphysics of possible experience related to the solution of the [semantic] problem set in his famous letter to M. Hertz (02.21.1772): “What is the ground of the relation of that in us which we call 'representation' to the object?” There are two possible ways to solve it: empiricism and apriorism, – and Kant chooses the second of them, thus making his “Copernican Revolution”. In the Preface to the 2nd ed. Critique Kant (...) correlates his Copernican turn/revolution with "altered method of our way of thinking [in metaphysics]" [BXVIII] and considers it as an analogue of the hypothetico-deductive scientific method of Copernicus – Galileo – Newton. The analysis of structure of the Copernican Revolution shows that it is possible to pick out two vectors: the empirical (from the thing-in-itself to representations) and the noumenal ones (from the transcendental unity of apperception [or transcendental object] to objects of experience). The introduction of an a priori vector (resp. a priori forms) means that Kant's conception is not empirical, but Kant’s keeping empirical vector says that it is compatible with empirical realism [A370–1]. Thus, Kantian transcendentalism is a synthesis of realism (basic level) and transcendental idealism (as a meta-level superstructure above it), whose task is to find out and analyze the transcendental conditions [possibility] of our knowledge of objects. (shrink)

Fichte and Husserl both distinguish a properly philosophical or transcendental consciousness from natural or ordinary consciousness. The principal aim of this study is to provide clarification into the character of this philosophical consciousness, while simultaneously using this common idea as a means of establishing correspondences between the philosophies of Fichte and Husserl. The first section explicates certain relevant features of Husserl’s phenomenology, such as the reductions and his theory of intuition, while the second section ofters an exposition of significant (...) aspects of Fichte’s Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo, with special attention given to Chapter 8 of this text wherein Fichte’s theory of intellectual intuition finds elaboration. The final section reconstructs a “double-method” interpretation of transcendental philosophy according to which reason and the philosopher’s self-observations converge to produce a well-grounded philosophical science. Furthermore, a theory is outlinedthat interprets philosophical consciousness as a “subjective experience” that is grounded in a non-reflective immediate consciousness of spontaneity.Fichte et Husserl distinguent tous deux une conscience proprement philosophique et transcendantale d’une conscience naturelle ou ordinaire. Le but premier de cette étude est de clarifier la nature de cette conscience philosophique, tout en établissant, à l’aide de cette idée commune, une correspondance entre les philosophies de Fichte et Husserl. La première section analyse certains traits pertinents de la phénoménologie husserlienne, telles que les réductions et sa théorie de l’intuition, alors que la seconde section expose les aspects significatifs de la Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo de Fichte. Ici, une attention particulière sera accordée au chapitre 8 oú la théorie fichtéenne de l’intuition intellectuelle est élaborée. La dernière section reconstruit une «double méthode» d’interprétation de la philosophietranscendantale. Selon cette dernière, la raison et les observations de soi du philosophes convergent vers une science philosophique bien fondée. De plus, y est esquissée une théorie qui interprète la conscience philosophique comme «expérience subjective» fondée sur une conscience non-réflective et immédiate de la spontanéité. (shrink)

Machine generated contents note: 1. An Ethical Transcendental Philosophy 1 -- 2. Beyond Being. Ontology and Eschatology in the Philosophy of Emmanuel Levinas 33 -- 3. The Rationality of the Philosophy of Levinas 56 -- 4. Levinas on Substitution 83 -- 5. Judaism and Hellenism in the Philosophy of Levinas and Heidegger 101 -- 6. Ontological Difference (Heidegger) and Ontological Separation (Levinas) 115 -- 7. Enmity, Friendship, Corporeality 133 -- 8. The Rationality of Transcendence 147 (...) -- 9. Levinas on Theology and the Philosophy of Religion 169. (shrink)

In Phenomenology and the Problem of History. David Carr examines the paradox involving Husserl's transcendental philosophy and his later historicist theory.

In this thesis, I investigate realist, anti-realist and pluralist views in the philosophy of science and the philosophy of complexity. The philosophy of science can inform the philosophy of complexity and vice versa because we can consider scientific inquiry to largely involve the study of complex systems. I however find that the relevant realist, anti-realist and pluralist views are problematic in various ways, and that a version of pragmatism suggests a promising alternative. This version of pragmatism (...) incorporates elements of pluralism, but maintains a commitment to epistemic hierarchy, convergence and progress. The way to develop such a version of pragmatism is, I argue, by rebooting William Whewell’s 19th century philosophy of science. Whewell however held to the following two transcendental claims: 1. Empirical inquiry undertaken in science properly practiced can reveal necessary truths. 2. The revelation of such necessary truths grants us a glimpse of the mind of God. Such transcendental claims are obviously at odds with pragmatism. There are however core features of Whewell’s view that are notably pragmatist in nature, features that explicitly inspired Charles Sanders Piece’s convergent pragmatism. These are as follows: 3. Subject and object (or mind and world) are inextricably entwined during scientific inquiry; they are not separated by anything like a correspondence relationship. 4. Science progresses via what Whewell calls the consilience of inductions (an ongoing merging of scientific theories, a merging that increases our understanding of the world over time). I modify Whewell’s view by stripping away its transcendental elements while maintaining its pragmatist elements. What remains is, I argue, a robust and novel kind of pragmatism suitable for being introduced into the contemporary philosophy of science. Whewell suitably-pragmatised can offer new insights into ongoing debates, particularly those around the nature of scientific progress, scientific truth and scientific understanding. (shrink)

his paper explores the relationship between Kant’s views on the metaphysical foundations of Newtonian mathematical physics and his more general transcendental philosophy articulated in the Critique of pure reason. I argue that the relationship between the two positions is very close indeed and, in particular, that taking this relationship seriously can shed new light on the structure of the transcendental deduction of the categories as expounded in the second edition of the Critique.Author Keywords: Kant; Mathematical physics; (...) class='Hi'>Transcendental deduction. (shrink)

This third and final volume of the collected papers of the late Alfred Schutz contains for the most part the author's evaluation of later Husserlian thought. As in the first and second volumes, Schutz attempts to show the relevance of phenomenology to social experiences. All the papers in this volume were originally published between 1953-1958, except that in which Schutz compares James' "stream of thought" with Husserl's "stream of consciousness." The sequence of papers that follow the James article is: "Husserl's (...) Ideals, Vol. II," in which Schutz describes Husserl's attempt at a phenomenological analysis of the constitution of nature, beginning with inanimate objects, proceeding to "nature in a second and enlarged sense", and concluding with the region of Geist. "Husserl's Ideas, Vol. III": a brief paper analyzing the Husserlian ambition of a phenomenology which affords a fundamental method of grounding all knowledge. "The Problem of Transcendental Intersubjectivity in Husserl," in which Schutz pinpoints the problem well: since it is impossible to experience another person's original mental content, how can "another psychophysical ego be constituted in my ego?" How can solipsism be avoided? How can phenomenology be applied to the social sciences? Schutz concludes that with his notion of "pairing" in his Cartesian Meditations Husserl does not succeed in constituting a transcendental intersubjectivity through the conscious operations of a transcendental ego. "Type and Eidos in Husserl's Late Philosophy": the phenomenological look at the problem of universals. "Some Structures of the Life-World": a consideration of the Lebenswelt with an eye toward establishing the relevance to social sciences. The last two papers deal with the philosophy of Max Scheler.—J. J. R. (shrink)

Transcendental philosophy has traditionally sought to provide non-contingent grounds for certain aspects of cognitive, moral, and social life. Further, it has made a claim to being 'ultimately' grounded in the sense that its account of experience should provide a non-dogmatic account of its own possibility. Most current approaches to transcendental philosophy seek to do justice to these twin aspects of the project by making an 'intersubjective turn', taking the structure of dialogue or social practice rather than (...) the 'I think' or consciousness as the locus of ultimate grounds. After examining the recent debate over transcendental arguments in order to illuminate the relations between two important versions of transcendental philosophy- the neo-Kantian version oriented toward justification of principles and the phenomenological version oriented toward clarification of meaning- this paper criticizes internally connected aspects of the intersubjective turn in K. O. Apel, Bernhard Waldenfels, and a recent 'practical' interpretation of Husserl. It is shown that the twin demands of the project can be redeemed only if ultimate grounding is seen first of all not as an epistemological or ontological question but as an ethical one. This requires modification of the appeal to intersubjectivity and a qualified return to the first-person perspective. (shrink)

The summer of 1989 was an especially eventful one for Poland, but in the midst of all the political ferment some two dozen scholars from 10 countries —including the Federal Republic of Germany, Switzerland, Japan, Poland, the German Democratic Republic, China, Bulgaria, Italy, Israel, and the USA—spent five days together in a guest house owned by the Polish Academy of Sciences in the tiny village of Mogilany, a half-hour’s drive from Krakow. They were assembled for a conference organized by Prof. (...) Marek Siemek, Director of the Philosophical Institute of the University of Warsaw. Though the conference bore the general title, “Transcendental Philosophy and Dialectic,” almost all of the contributions were specifically concerned with aspects of the philosophy of J. G. Fichte. This was only fitting, since the ostensible occasion for the conference was to celebrate the 70th birthday of the world’s best-known Fichtean, Prof. Reinhard Lauth of the University of Munich. Since the majority of the participants had also participated in the two International Fichte Conferences held in Austria in 1977 and 1987 there was something of an air of a class reunion about the gathering, which made for an especially congenial conference. (shrink)

PREFACE Towards the end of his important article 'What is Phenomenology?" Adolf Reinach writes: When we wish to break with all theories and constructions in ...

In the following, the American reader is to be familiarized with what is called the Munich School and, in particular, with my systematic philosophical work. The Munich School began to form at the start of the fifties. This School regards itself as philosophically transcendental, not in the sense that a new position is founded by it, but as the advocate and conveyor of the one transcendental philosophy. Transcendental philosophy, namely, was founded, according to the understanding (...) of this School, essentially through René Descartes, and for the first time was detailed and realized as a system by Johann Gottlieb Fichte. In this essay, therefore, I will trace the origin of transcendental philosophy and the development of it, and will try to show the place which my own work and that of the colleagues associated with me have in the presentation of transcendental philosophy. (shrink)

The study of the “first wave” of reactions to the Critique of Pure Reason in Germany from the second half of the 1780s until the beginning of the nineteenth century reveals the paradoxical status of the Kantian transcendental subject. While the existence of the transcendental subject, whatever the term means, is not open to question since it arises from the very essence of critical philosophy, the fundamental status of the subject is sometimes questioned in this period. Although (...) the meaning of the concept of transcendental subject seems obvious today it lends itself to various interpretations in the late eighteenth century. To achieve my goal I have undertaken a textological analysis of the works of the earliest opponents and followers of the Kantian critique and a reconstruction of the conceptual field in the midst of which the transcendental subject has been planted. Among others I draw on the works of J. S. Beck, J. A. Eberhard, J. G. Hamann, F. H. Jacobi, S. Maimon, K. L. Reinhold, G. E. Schulze and A. Weishaupt. The authors of the period are grouped depending on the common themes and questions that prompted them to turn to the concept of the transcendental subject, even though the results of their reflections did not always coincide. These authors think of the transcendental subject in its relationship to the transcendental object, or as “something = х”, and in terms of the relationship of representation to the object. It is characterised sometimes as something absolutely hollow, and sometimes as the fullness of true reality. The status ascribed to the transcendental subject is sometimes that of a thing-in-itself and sometimes that of a “mere” idea. Finally, Kant’s transcendental subject was sometimes seen as something to be overcome and sometimes as an infinite challenge to understanding. (shrink)

The paper discusses the Strawsonian concept of descriptive metaphysics and its various implementations in conceptions of I. Kant, R.G. Collingwood and P.F. Strawson, their similarities and differences. Particular attention is paid to the analysis of Kant's transcendental philosophy (resp. transcendental idealism), or its metaphysics of appearance as a pioneer version of descriptive metaphysics and its comparison with the version of descriptive metaphysics of P. Strawson himself.

At the present time, there are several interpretations and modes of Kant’s transcendental philosophy (TP). Which of these interpretations and modes of transcendentalism most adequately express the spirit of TP, i.e. can claim the title of the transcendental ones? For the explication of the ‘idea of transcendental philosophy’ [KrV, A1], here I distinguish two transcendental shifts: methodological and metaphysical ones, which in their totality predetermine the essence and set the specificity of Kant’s transcendental (...) idealism. The methodological transcendental shift that Kant postulates in his definitions of TP in the Critique of Pure Reason [KrV, A11; B25] represents a shift from studying of objects to the analysis and justification of our mode of cognition of objects. This shift sets a fairly wide range of a la Kantian a priori doctrines and predetermines the transcendental turn (Re–Transcendentalising) of modern philosophy. The metaphysical transcendental shift that can be correlated with “the altered method of our way of thinking [in metaphysics]” [KrV, BXVIII], is associated with the splitting of the “thing” into the actual object (or Kantian thing-in-itself) and object of experience (or Kantian appearance), and involves a transition from the study of thing-in-itself to the analysis of the appearance. More precisely, this shift finds its expression in the transcendental triad “object (thing-in-itself; Ding an sich) – appearance (Erscheinung) – representation (Vorstellung)”, which determines the ‘idea’ (essence) of transcendental idealism/metaphysics. (shrink)

Our study aims to deal with different and similar conditions between Ghazzali and Kant, as characters at whom can show two different thinking form and two different cultural structure in their thoughts, in the context of the same subject. The article investigates the stages of these two thinkers approaches to the topic of transcendental dialectic and tries to display that why and how two different cultural worlds incline to this subject.

In speaking of transcendental philosophy here, I mean philosophy as a procedurally rigorous, systematic, and deductive instrument for the general and specific founding of science. I thereby presuppose that transcendental philosophy is not only possible but also is already established, at least in its general fundamentals. Its relevance to the empirical science of psychology can readily be conceived: transcendental philosophy should provide, in a rigorous, systematic, and deductive fashion, an a priori conceptual basis (...) specific to psychology. This conceptual basis should include the theoretical and practical heuristic principles necessary for meaningful research into the relevant area of reality, as well as for the sensible use of the resulting knowledge in general social praxis. (shrink)

The essays collected here are divided into two parts. The first group primarily considers the influence of Emil Lask’s philosophy of transcendental logic on Husserl and Heidegger. The second group focuses mostly on Heidegger’s thought, and its relation to Husserl and phenomenology. Overall, the book “argues that transcendental phenomenology is indispensable to the philosophical elucidation of the space of meaning”, which the author characterizes variously as the “transcendental field of inquiry” of any kind, “the intelligibility that (...) is presupposed in all positive inquiry”, “the thematic field of philosophical inquiry”, the “horizon of intelligibility”, “the world horizon as such”, or simply “world” in the Heideggerian sense. The “aim [of the papers] is to suggest how transcendental phenomenology, as ‘first philosophy,’ provides an alternative to the ancient metaphysical paradigm and the modern epistemological one”. (shrink)

Dan Zahavi presents a rich new study of the philosophy of Edmund Husserl, the founder of phenomenology. What kind of philosophical project was Husserl engaged in? What is ultimately at stake in so-called phenomenological analyses? In this volume Zahavi makes it clear why Husserl had such a decisive influence on 20th-century philosophy.

Professor Findlay in this book, originally published in 1961, set out to justify, and to some extent carry out, a ‘material value-ethic’, ie. A systematic setting forth of the ends of rational action. The book is in the tradition of Moore, Rashfall, Ross, Scheler and Hartmann though it avoids altogether dogmatic intuitive methods. It argues that an organised framework of ends of action follows from the attitude underlying our moral pronouncements, and that this framework, while allowing personal elaboration, is not (...) a matter for individual decision. The relations connecting our fundamental value-judgements with one another, and the frames of mind behind them, are not rigorously deductive but are sufficiently compelling to be called logical. Something of a ‘transcendental deduction’ of a well-ordered family for our basic heads of valuation is both possible and necessary. The work is further critical of the notion of obligation which has been extended far beyond legal contracts and understandings. The book also contains a chapter on religion. (shrink)

In this paper I seek to shed some light on Heidegger's conception of phenomenology, and on the relationship between Heidegger's conception and that of Husserl. In particular, I am concerned to elucidate the sense in which Heidegger's phenomenology can be seen as a species of transcendental philosophy. In the concluding section of the paper I briefly consider the significance of Heidegger's conception of phenomenology for his later philosophy, as represented by 'The Question Concerning Technology'.

Luz Seiberth's interpretation of Sellars as a transcendental philosopher promises to change the way we read Sellars. Nonetheless, I dispute two of his central claims: that by depicting ”picturing” as as a transcendental imposition we can see it as addressing a ”vertical” constraint that Kant does not detect; and that Sellars's transcendental philosophy commits him to a Kantian ”necessitarianism” about categorical strucure. Ultimately, I conclude, Seiberth's focus on Sellars's relationship to Kant in particular distorts his understanding (...) of Sellars's peculiar version of a transcendental methodology. (shrink)

Merab Mamardashvili’s philosophy can be defined as the philosophy of the transcendent event. An event is at once extremely concrete and extremely abstract. It occurs in an act of a special kind: an autonomous act which is not the realization of any pattern of transcendental historicity, is not attached to any teleology, that is, its meaning does not consist in the realization of a goal. It is, plainly speaking, purposeless and therefore indeterminate. However, this is not a (...) variety of actionism, not an outburst of absurdity subverting all order. An act turns out to be the realization of the “ontological abstraction of order” by means of a symbol actualized by the very event of the act. The article examines various aspects of the event from the aesthetic to the meta-historical. (shrink)

With the growing interest in Renaissance studies, it is gratifying to see a major scholarly work on a little known philosopher of the Averroistic trend of Aristotelianism that had its seat in his native city of Bologna. Matsen’s study, whose first draft was submitted as a doctoral dissertation at Columbia University, opens with a summary presentation of Alessandro Achillini’s life and works based on archival documents and other first-hand sources. The body of the work focuses on two major themes: (...) the theory of universals and the concept of transcendentals. All students of philosophy are aware of the importance attached to the problem of universals by medieval schoolmen and the consequences that their solution had on their systems of philosophy. It is likewise known that the meaning and value of such transcendental concepts as being, unity, truth, goodness, and the like played a substantial role in the shaping of medieval metaphysics built mainly along Platonic and Aristotelian lines. The fact that a Renaissance man like Achillini carried on the discussion of both topics to such a degree as to devote an entire Quaestio to the study of universals and the first part of his De distinctionibus to the analysis of the transcendentals, shows, among other things, the extent to which Renaissance thought is indebted to medieval philosophy. What is less known, however, is the impact that William of Ockham, whose influence was felt throughout the entire fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, has also had on Renaissance thinkers, and especially on Achillini. A comparison between Ockham’s position on the nature of both the universals and the transcendentals has led Matsen to conclude that there is a striking similarity of view between Ockham and Achillini on many important issues and that the latter was the principal cause of the revival of Ockhamism at Bologna around 1500. (shrink)

Kant points to two forms of self-consciousness: the inner sense, or empirical apperception, based on a sensory form of self-awareness, and transcendental apperception. Through the notion of inner sense, Kant also allows for an introspective account of self-awareness; nonetheless, Kant holds an utterly sophisticated notion of basic self-consciousness provided for by the notion of transcendental apperception. As we will see, the doctrine of apperception is not to be confused with an introspective psychological approach: in reality, it is a (...) formal model for the thinking activity itself which explains the most central concepts regarding subjecthood. (shrink)

This paper will deal with the problem of practical intentionality in the transcendental phenomenology of Husserl. First, through an analysis of a passage found in Logical Investigations, I will show Husserl''s earlier position with respect to the problem of practical intentionality. I will then go on to critically assess this position and, with reference to some of Husserl''s works written after the 1920''s, prove that every intentionality should be regarded as a practical intentionality. Correspondingly, transcendental phenomenology should also (...) be characterized as a practical philosophy. I make this statement with the following two senses in mind; transcendental phenomenology is a practical philosophy, first, in the sense that it investigates the various forms of practical intentionality and, second, in the sense that transcendental intentionality as the grounding source of transcendental phenomenology is also a kind of practical intentionality. (shrink)

The article analyzes the rationale for S.I. Hessen’s idea of transcendental empiricism, which highlights the issue of the individual and makes it “the fundamental bedrock of truth.” The author also discusses Hessen’s understanding of individual causality and its forms in the process of cognition of historical reality.

Fichte and Husserl both distinguish a properly philosophical or transcendental consciousness from natural or ordinary consciousness. The principal aim of this study is to provide clarification into the character of this philosophical consciousness, while simultaneously using this common idea as a means of establishing correspondences between the philosophies of Fichte and Husserl. The first section explicates certain relevant features of Husserl’s phenomenology, such as the reductions and his theory of intuition, while the second section ofters an exposition of significant (...) aspects of Fichte’s Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo, with special attention given to Chapter 8 of this text wherein Fichte’s theory of intellectual intuition finds elaboration. The final section reconstructs a “double-method” interpretation of transcendental philosophy according to which reason and the philosopher’s self-observations converge to produce a well-grounded philosophical science. Furthermore, a theory is outlinedthat interprets philosophical consciousness as a “subjective experience” that is grounded in a non-reflective immediate consciousness of spontaneity.Fichte et Husserl distinguent tous deux une conscience proprement philosophique et transcendantale d’une conscience naturelle ou ordinaire. Le but premier de cette étude est de clarifier la nature de cette conscience philosophique, tout en établissant, à l’aide de cette idée commune, une correspondance entre les philosophies de Fichte et Husserl. La première section analyse certains traits pertinents de la phénoménologie husserlienne, telles que les réductions et sa théorie de l’intuition, alors que la seconde section expose les aspects significatifs de la Wissenschaftslehre nova methodo de Fichte. Ici, une attention particulière sera accordée au chapitre 8 oú la théorie fichtéenne de l’intuition intellectuelle est élaborée. La dernière section reconstruit une «double méthode» d’interprétation de la philosophietranscendantale. Selon cette dernière, la raison et les observations de soi du philosophes convergent vers une science philosophique bien fondée. De plus, y est esquissée une théorie qui interprète la conscience philosophique comme «expérience subjective» fondée sur une conscience non-réflective et immédiate de la spontanéité. (shrink)

Debates in Modern Philosophy: Essential Readings and Contemporary Responses provides an in-depth, engaging introduction to important issues in modern philosophy. It presents 13 key interpretive debates to students, and ranges in coverage from Descartes' Meditations to Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. -/- Debates include: -/- Did Descartes have a developed and consistent view about how the mind interacts with the body? Was Leibniz an idealist, or did he believe in corporeal substances? What is Locke's theory of personal identity? (...) Could there be a Berkeleian metaphysics without God? Did Hume believe in causal powers? What is Kant's transcendental idealism? -/- Each of the thirteen debates consists of a well known article or book chapter from a living philosopher, followed by a new response from a different scholar, specially commissioned for this volume. Every debate is prefaced by an introduction written for those coming upon the debates for the first time and followed by an annotated list for further reading. The volume starts with an introduction that explains the importance and relevance of the modern period and its key debates to philosophy and ends with a glossary that covers terms from both the modern period and the study of the history of philosophy in general. -/- Debates in Modern Philosophy will help students evaluate different interpretations of key texts from modern philosophy, and provide a model for constructing their own positions in these debates. (shrink)