Human Studies

, Volume 36, Issue 3, pp 357–374 | Cite as

Edmund Husserl in Talcott Parsons: Analytical Realism and Phenomenology

Theoretical / Philosophical Paper

Abstract

This article aims at clarifying the philosophical (=phenomenological) implication of Talcott Parsons’s analytical realism. Generally, his theory is understood as being confrontational to phenomenology; however, in his first book, The Structure of Social Action, Parsons positively referred to Husserl’s Logical Investigations. They shared a sense of crisis: Husserl thought that there was no certain basis in modern science, and Parsons had the feeling that there was no common theory to establish sociology as a science. Thus, both of them criticized the factual sciences of positivism (positivistic empiricism) and showed a strong orientation to the general theory. For this, they depended on conceptual realism (Platonic realism). According to Husserl, scientific knowledge will be arbitrary if the Ideal is not there as the norm of fact. He believed that in truth all people always see Ideas. Similarly, Parsons thought that in truth all people always act toward the Ideal, because the Ideal element is necessarily found through the logical framework of sociology, i.e., the action frame of reference. Hence, he maintained that the Ideal element that gives a normative orientation to actions is real, though analytical, insofar as the social order is established.

Keywords

Talcott Parsons Edmund Husserl Analytical realism Phenomenology Voluntaristic theory of action Action frame of reference 

References

  1. Akasaka, M. (2009). Syakai sisutemu riron seiseishi: Vui parêto, eru jei hendâson, tî pâsonzu [The history of the social system theory: V. Pareto, L. J. Henderson, T. Parsons]. Nishinomiya: Kanseigakuindaigaku syuppankai [Kwansei Gakuin University Press]. (In Japanese).Google Scholar
  2. Bauman, Z. (1976). Hermeneutics and social science. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Grathoff, R. (Ed.). (1978). The theory of social action: The correspondence of Alfred Schutz and Talcott Parsons. Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Holenstein, E. (1975). Jakobson ou le structuralisme phénoménologique. Paris: Seghers.Google Scholar
  5. Husserl, E. (1913/1901). Logische Untersuchungen. Bd.2: Untersuchungen zur Phänomenologie und Theorie der Erkenntnis, I. Teil, 2. umgearbeiteten Aufl. Halle a. d. S.: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  6. Husserl, E. (1950/1913). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie. Erstes Buch: Allgemeine Einführung in die reine Phänomenologie. In W. Biemel hrsg., Husserliana Bd.III. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  7. Husserl, E. (1968/1962). Der Encyclopaedia Britannica Artikel. In W. Biemel (Ed.), Husserliana Bd.IX: Phänomenologische Psychologie (pp. 237–301). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  8. Husserl, E. (1976/1936). Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie: Eine Einleitung in die phänomenologische Philosophie. In W. Biemel (Ed.), Husserliana Bd.VI: Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie (pp. 1–276), 2. Aufl. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  9. Husserl, E. (1976/1954). Die Krisis des europäischen Menschentums und die Philosophie. In W. Biemel (Ed.), Husserliana Bd.VI: Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie (pp. 314–348), 2. Aufl. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  10. Husserl, E. (1979/1894). Bericht über deutsche Schriften zur Logik aus dem Jahre 1894 (1897). In Bernhard Rang hrsg., Husserliana Bd.XXII: Aufsätze und Rezensionen (1890–1910) (pp. 124–151). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  11. Jules-Rosette, B. (1980). Talcott Parsons and the phenomenological tradition in sociology: An unresolved debate. Human Studies, 3, 311–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kida, G. (1977). Genshôgaku towa nani ka?: Nijusseiki shisô ni okeru imi [What is phenomenology?: Its meaning in the 20th century thought]. Gendai-shisô [Modern thought], 5(2), 86–93. (In Japanese).Google Scholar
  13. Lovejoy, A. O. (1936). The great chain of being: a study of the history of an idea. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Luhmann, N. (1984). Soziale systeme: Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. Suhrkamp: Frankfurt a.M.Google Scholar
  15. Natanson, M. (1978). Foreword. In R. Grathoff (Ed.), The theory of social action: The correspondence of Alfred Schutz and Talcott Parsons (pp. Ix–xvi). Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Parsons, T. (1968/1937). The structure of social action: A study in social theory with special reference to a group of recent European writers (Vol. I–II). New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  17. Parsons, T. (1977/1974/1970). On building social system theory: A personal history. In Social systems and the evolution of action theory (pp. 22–76). New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  18. Parsons, T. (1978/1941). Parsons: ‘I must confess to being skeptical of phenomenological analysis’. In R. Grathoff (Ed.), The theory of social action: The correspondence of Alfred Schutz and Talcott Parsons (pp. 79–93). Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Rehorick, D. A. (1980). Schutz and Parsons: Debate or dialogue. Human Studies, 3, 347–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schutz, A. (1966/1957–8). Max Scheler's epistemology and Ethics. In Aron Gurwitsch (Ed.), Alfred Schutz. Collected papers III: Studies in phenomenological philosophy (pp. 145–178). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  21. Schutz, A. (1978/1940). Parsons’ theory of social action: A critical review. In: R. Grathoff (Ed.), The theory of social action: The correspondence of Alfred Schutz and Talcott Parsons (pp. 8–60). Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Tada, M. (2010). Intentionality of communication: Theory of self-referential social systems as sociological phenomenology. Schutzian research: A yearbook of lifeworldly phenomenology and qualitative social science, 2, 181–200.Google Scholar
  23. Tada, M. (2012) Syakaiteki sekai no jikan kôsei: Syakaigakuteki gensyôgaku toshite no syakai sisutemu riron. [The temporal construction of the social world: Theory of social systems as sociological phenomenology]. Doctoral Dissertation, Waseda University (In Japanese).Google Scholar
  24. Tominaga, K. (2004). Sengo nihon no syakaigaku: Hitotsu no dôjidai gakushi [Sociology in postwar Japan: A contemporary history]. Tokyo: Tôkyôdaigaku syuppankai [University of Tokyo Press]. (In Japanese).Google Scholar
  25. Whitehead, A. N. (1967/1925). Science and the modern world: Lowell lectures. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  26. Yamamoto, M. (1980). Jitsuzaisei ni tsuite [On reality]. In N. Sawada, A. Ôide, K. Nakayama, & K. Udô (Eds.), Kagaku to sonzairon [Science and ontology] (pp. 197–207). Tokyo: Shisakusha. (In Japanese).Google Scholar
  27. Yui, K. (2002) Pâsonzu to syakaigaku riron no genzai: Tî Pî to yobareta chi no ryôiki ni tsuite [Parsons and sociological theory today: On the intellectual field called T. P.]. Kyoto: Sekaishisôsha. (In Japanese).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of LettersKumamoto UniversityKumamotoJapan

Personalised recommendations