Advertisement

Continental Philosophy Review

, Volume 52, Issue 1, pp 125–134 | Cite as

Comments on Johanna Oksala’s Feminist Experiences

  • Andreea Smaranda AldeaEmail author
Book review
  • 38 Downloads

Some general thoughts

Johanna Oksala’s book seeks to defend feminist philosophy as a form of social critique that aims not only to expose potent epistemic and normative structures but also to open new possibilities for social betterment and justice (3).1It thus challenges us to think carefully about the resources such a social critique could draw on. According to Oksala, feminist philosophy would benefit from mining the resources of a potentially rich intersection: Foucault’s work and what she refers to as ‘post-phenomenology.’ Rather than viewing these two theoretical traditions as mutually exclusive, Oksala sees them as fertile grounds for feminist philosophy understood as immanent critique (4). And since feminist philosophy seeks to analyze the manner in which these structures constitute our social reality, it is necessarily metaphysical in a Kantian sense (6). However, unlike the Kantian universalist approach, Oksala’s proposal is deeply historical. To expose these structures—or...

References

  1. Al-Saji, A. 2014. A Phenomenology of Hesitation: Interrupting Racializing Habits of Seeing. In Living Alterities: Phenomenology, Embodiment, and Race, ed. E. Lee, 133–172. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  2. Aldea, A.S. 2016. Phenomenology as Critique: Teleological-Historical Reflection and Husserl’s Transcendental Eidetics. Husserl Studies 32: 21–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aldea, A.S. 2017. Making Sense of Husserl’s Notion of Teleology: Normativity, Reason, Progress and Phenomenology as Critique from Within. Hegel Bulletin 38(1): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aldea, A.S. and A. Allen. 2016. ‘The Historical A Priori in Husserl and Foucault’, Special Issue of Continental Philosophy Review 49/1.Google Scholar
  5. Heinämaa, S. 2003. Toward a Phenomenology of Sexual Difference. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  6. Husserl, E. 1948. Erfahrung und Urteil. Ludwig Landgrebe (Ed.). Hamburg: Claassen & Goverts. (abbreviated as EU throughout).Google Scholar
  7. Hua I. 1950. Cartesianische Meditationen und Pariser Vorträge. Stephan Strasser (Ed.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  8. Hua III/1. 1976. Ideen zu Einer Reinen Phänomenologie und Phänomenologischen Philosophie, Erstes Buch. Karl Schuhmann (Ed.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff. Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology.Google Scholar
  9. Hua IV. 1952. Ideen zur einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie. Zweites Buch: Phänomenologische Untersuchungen zur Konstitution. Marly Biemel (Ed.). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  10. Hua VI. 1954. Die Krisis de Europäischen Wissenschaften und die Transzendentale Phänomenologie. Walter Biemel (Ed.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  11. Hua XI. 1966. Analysen zur Passiven Synthesis. Aus Vorlesungs- und Forschungsmanuskripten 19181926. Margot Fleischer (Ed.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  12. Hua XXIII. 1980. Phantasie, Bildbewusstsein, Erinnerung 18981925. Eduard Marbach (Ed.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  13. Merleau-Ponty, M. 2012. Phenomenology of Perception. Landes, D. (Trans.). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Wehrle, M. 2016. Normative Embodiment The Role of the Body in Foucault’s Genealogy A Phenomenological Re-Reading. Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology 47(1): 56–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Kent State UniversityKentUSA

Personalised recommendations