Husserl Studies

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 1–15 | Cite as

The Metaphysical Neutrality of Husserlian Phenomenology

Article

Abstract

I argue that Husserlian phenomenology is metaphysically neutral, in the sense of being compatible with multiple metaphysical frameworks (including frameworks Husserl argued against). For example, though Husserl dismisses the concept of an unknowable thing in itself as “material nonsense”, I argue that the concept is coherent and that the existence of such things is compatible with Husserl’s phenomenology. I defend this metaphysical neutrality approach against a number of objections and consider some of its implications for Husserl interpretation.

References

  1. Ameriks, K. (1977). Husserl’s Realism. The Philosophical Review, 498–519.Google Scholar
  2. Ameriks, K. (n.d.). A representation of Edmund Husserl. Retrieved from http://www.lesterembree.net/husserlscript.htm.
  3. Boehm, R. (1959). Zum Begriff des “Absoluten” bei Husserl. Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, 214–242.Google Scholar
  4. Carr, D. (1999). The paradox of subjectivity: The self in the transcendental tradition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Cerbone, D. R. (1995). World, world-entry, and realism in early Heidegger. Inquiry, 38(4), 401–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crowell, S. G. (2001). Husserl, Heidegger, and the space of meaning: Paths toward transcendental phenomenology. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Drummond, J. J. (1990). Husserlian intentionality and non-foundational realism: Noema and object. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. D’Zmura, M., Colantoni, P., and Seyranian, G. (2000). Virtual environments with four or more spatial dimensions. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 9(6), 616–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Embree, L. (1991). A representation of Edmund Husserl. Videotape: Boca Raton, FL. Center for Advanced Research in Phenomenology.Google Scholar
  10. Gurwitsch, A. (2010). Critical study of Husserl’s Nachwort. In R. Zaner (Ed.), The collected works of Aron Gurwitsch (1901–1973) (pp. 119–127). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Haddock, G. E. R. (2008). The young Carnap’s unknown master. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
  12. Hall, H. (1982). Was Husserl a realist or an idealist? In H. Hall and H. Dreyfus (Eds.), Husserl, intentionality, and cognitive science (pp. 169–190). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. Holmes, R. H. (1975). Is transcendental phenomenology committed to idealism? The Monist, 59(1), 98–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hua I. Husserl, E. (1963). Cartesianische Meditationen und Pariser Vorträge (1931). S. Strasser (Hg.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff; Cartesian meditations. D. Cairns (Trans.). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  15. Hua III/1. Husserl, E. (1976). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie. Erstes Buch: Allgemeine Einführung in die reine Phänomenologie. K. Schuhmann (Ed.). Den Hague: Martinus Nijhoff; Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy. First book: General introduction to a pure phenomenology. F. Kersten (Trans.). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1983.Google Scholar
  16. Hua VI. Husserl, E. (1962). Die Krisis der Europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie: Eine Einleitung in die phänomenologische Philosophie. W. Biemel (Ed.). Den Hague: Martinus Nijhoff; The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology: An introduction to phenomenological philosophy. D. Carr (Trans.). Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1970.Google Scholar
  17. Hua IX. Husserl, E. (1962). Phänomenologische Psychologie. Vorlesungen Sommersemester 1925. W. Biemel (Ed.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  18. Hua XV. Husserl, E. (1973). Zur Phänomenologie der Intersubjektivität, 3. Teil. Texte aus dem Nachlass (1929–1935). I. Kern (Hg.). Dordrecht/Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  19. Hua XVI. Husserl, E. (1973). Ding und Raum. U. Claesges (Hg.). Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff; Thing and space. R. Rojcewicz (Trans.). Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1997.Google Scholar
  20. Hua XIX/1. Husserl, E. (1984). Logische Untersuchungen. Zweiter Band. Erster Teil. Untersuchungen zur Phänomenologie und Theorie der Erkenntnis. U. Panzer (Hg.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  21. Hua XXXVI. Husserl, E. (2003). Transzendentaler Idealismus. Text aus dem Nachlass (1908–1921). R. D. Rollinger and R. Sowa (Eds.). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  22. Husserl, E. (1994). Briefwechsel. Husserliana Dokumente III/1-10. K. Schuhmann and E. Schuhmann (Eds.), Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  23. Hylton, P. (2012). Willard van Orman Quine. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2012.)Google Scholar
  24. Jackson, F. (1982). Epiphenomenal qualia. The Philosophical Quarterly, 32(127), 127–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kasmier, D. (2010). A defense of Husserl’s method of free variation. In P. Vandevelde and S. Luft (Eds.), Epistemology, archaeology, ethics: Current investigations of Husserl’s corpus. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  26. Luft, S. (2011). Subjectivity and lifeworld in transcendental phenomenology. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  27. McGinn, C. (1989). Can we solve the mind-body problem? Mind, 98(391), 349–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Nagel, T. (1974). What is it like to be a bat? The Philosophical Review, 83(4), 435–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Philipse, H. (1995). Transcendental idealism. In B. Smith and D. W. Smith (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Husserl. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Schuhmann, K., and Smith, B. (1985). Against idealism: Johannes Daubert vs. Husserl’s Ideas I. The Review of Metaphysics, 39(4), 763–793.Google Scholar
  31. Smith, A. D. (2003). Routledge philosophy guidebook to Husserl and the Cartesian Meditations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Smith, D. W., and McIntyre, R. (1982). Husserl and intentionality: A study of mind, meaning, and language. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Smith, D. W. (2013). Husserl (2nd edition.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. Stroffregen, T. A., and Pittenger, J. B. (1995). Human echolocation as a basic form of perception and action. Ecological Psychology, 7(3), 181–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Uemura, G. (2013). Making sense of the actuality. Husserl’s transcendental idealism as a metaphysics of modality. In 44th Husserl Circle Meeting (pp. 142–156). Graz, Austria.Google Scholar
  36. Wallner, I. M. (1987). In defense of Husserl’s transcendental idealism: Roman Ingarden’s critique re-examined. Husserl Studies, 4(1), 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Willard, D. (2002). The world well won: Husserl’s epistemic realism one hundred years later. In D. Zahavi and F. Stjernfelt (Eds.), One hundred years of phenomenology (pp. 69–78). Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Yoshimi, J. (2010). Husserl on psycho-physical laws. New yearbook for phenomenology and phenomenological philosophy, 10, 25–42.Google Scholar
  39. Zahavi, D. (2003). Phenomenology and metaphysics. In Metaphysics, facticity, interpretation (pp. 3–22). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zahavi, D. (2010). Husserl and the “absolute”. In C. Ierna, H. Jacobs and F. Mattens (Eds.), Philosophy, phenomenology, sciences: Essays in commemoration of Husserl (pp. 71–92). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cognitive and Information SciencesUniversity of California, MercedMercedUSA

Personalised recommendations