Skip to main content
Log in

An involuntary phenomenologist. The case of Alexandru Dragomir

  • Published:
Studies in East European Thought Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Alexandru Dragomir became widely known in Romania as a philosopher 2 years after his death, in 2004. He had no prior publications and only a few of his close acquaintances were even aware of his work as a thinker. The editors of the five volumes of his posthumous papers have from the onset tried to present Dragomir, a former doctoral student of Heidegger, as a phenomenologist, while this interpretation is today well-established. The following paper tries to submit this interpretation to a closer scrutiny, on the one hand, by addressing the history of Dragomir’s publication and reception in Romania and abroad, and on the other hand, by analyzing several aspects of his oeuvre which do indeed hold close resemblance to aspects of the phenomenological method, even though they actually have quite different motivations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Noica (1995), p. 6, fn.

  2. Anton (2005).

  3. Liiceanu (2004), p. LIX. English translation: p. 58..

  4. http://institute.phenomenology.ro/.

  5. Cf. Dragomir (2006), p. 423. The passage is for sure merely a list of paragraphs from the first book of the Ideas, but the list comprises 16 paragraphs from throughout the volume, unrelated to any specific topic. Thus, Dragomir’s intention here was obviously not that of simply recapitulating a precise issue, but rather that of selectively ranging through the entire work.

  6. See for instance Dragomir (2006), p. 390 f.

  7. Liiceanu (2004), p. LXII. English translation: p. 60.

  8. In several of his early lectures, Heidegger explicitly addresses this issue by speaking of the “fundamental discoveries of phenomenology”. In the lecture course of the WS 1923/24, Einführung in die phänomenologische Forschung, he enumerates three such discoveries: intentionality, the conception of evidence and eidetic intuition; in the spring of 1925, in his Kassel lectures, he only names two: intentionality and categorial intuition, while in the lecture course of the SS 1925, Prolegomena zur Geschichte des Zeitbegriffs, one can again find all three, but in a different phrasing: intentionality, categorial intuition and the discovery of the original meaning of the a priori. Cf. Heidegger (1994), p. 34 f.

  9. Husserl (1984), p. 342.

  10. Husserl (1989), p. 39.

  11. It would be no doubt interesting to study the resurgence of this Socratic paradigm throughout the history of late modern and contemporary philosophy as an argument for a practice of philosophy that detaches itself from any public or institutional anchors (in Kierkegaard or Patočka for instance).

  12. Liiceanu and Cercel (2011), p. 158.

  13. Dragomir (2004), p. 10.

  14. Cf. Husserl (1973), p. 124. English translation: p. 92..

  15. Husserl (1973), p. 124. English translation: p. 92.

  16. Dragomir (2004), p. 25.

  17. Dragomir (2004), p. 79.

  18. Schmitz (2009), p. 13.

  19. Schmitz (2011), p. 59 f.

  20. Husserl (1994), p. 94.

  21. Dragomir (2005), p. 7.

References

  • Anton, F. (2005). „Sint filozof de la 16 ani“. Dialog cu Alexandru Dragomir. In: Observatorul cultural. Supliment: http://www.observatorcultural.ro/articol/sint-filozof-de-la-16-ani-dialog-cu-alexandru-dragomir-2/.

  • Dragomir, A. (2004). Crase banalități metafizice. Bucharest: Humanitas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dragomir, A. (2005). Cinci plecări din prezent. Bucharest: Humanitas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dragomir, A. (2006). Caietele timpului. Bucharest: Humanitas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, M. (1994). Prolegomena zur Geschichte des Zeitbegriffs (Sommersemester 1925). Frankfurt/Main: Vittorio Klosterman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1973). Cartesianische Meditationen und Pariser Vorträge. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. (D. Cairns, E. Husserl, Cartesian Meditations. An Introduction to Phenomenology, Trans.) The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1960.

  • Husserl, E. (1984). Logische Untersuchungen. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1989). Aufsätze und Vorträge (1922–1937). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1994). Briefwechsel. Vol. VII: Wissenschaftkorrespondenz. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Liiceanu, G. (2004). Caietele din subterană. In: A. Dragomir. Crase banalități metafizice. Bucharest: Humanitas. English translation by Brown, J.C.: Liiceanu, G., The Notebooks from Underground. In: Studia Phaenomenologica IV/3-4 (2004).

  • Liiceanu, G., & Cercel, G. (2011). Întâlnire în jurul unei palme zen. Bucharest: Humanitas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noica, C. (1995). Meditaţii introductive asupra lui Heidegger. In M. Heidegger (Ed.), Originea operei de artă. Bucharest: Humanitas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitz, H. (2009). Kurze Einführung in die Neue Phänomenologie. Freiburg/München: Karl Alber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitz, H. (2011). Der Leib. Berlin: De Gruyter.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Ferencz-Flatz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ferencz-Flatz, C. An involuntary phenomenologist. The case of Alexandru Dragomir. Stud East Eur Thought 69, 45–55 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11212-017-9271-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11212-017-9271-3

Keywords

Navigation