Continental Philosophy Review

, Volume 45, Issue 3, pp 447–459 | Cite as

Empathy and second-person methodology

Article

Abstract

How the phenomenology of empathy in Husserl and beyond and the second-person approach of cognition are able to mutually enrich and constrain each other? Whereas the intersubjective empathy is limited to face-to-face inter-individual relational experiences or, when socially embedded, results a non-individualized understanding of others in general, the second person approach of cognition opens the way for a plural relational yet individualized understanding of the other. I would like to show in this paper how the integration of both phenomenological and cognitive fields paves the way for the more encompassing description of intersubjective experience as a “relational multiplicity,” which I will ultimately describe through the empirical practice of an emergency psychiatric unit.

Keywords

Phenomenology Husserl Empathy The other Intersubjectivity 

References

  1. Bitbol, M. 2002. Science as if situation mattered. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 1: 181–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boszormenyi-Nagy, I. 1987. Foundation of contextual therapy. Collected papers of Ivan Boszormenyi-Nagy. New-York: Brunner Mazel.Google Scholar
  3. Chalmers, D. 1995. Facing up to the problem of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies 2(3): 200–219.Google Scholar
  4. Depraz, N. 1995. Transcendance et incarnation. L’altérité à soi dans la philosophie de Edmund Husserl. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  5. Depraz, N. 2001. The Husserlian theory of intersubjectivity as alterology. Emergent theories and wisdom traditions in the light of genetc phenomenology. Special issue ed. E. Thompson between ourselves. Second-person issues in the study of consciousness. Journal of Conciousness Studies 8(5–7): 169–178.Google Scholar
  6. Depraz, N., F.J. Varela, and P. Vermersch. 2003. On becoming aware. A pragmatics of experiencing. Boston/Amsterdam: Benjamins Press.Google Scholar
  7. Depraz N., and Cosmelli D. 2003. Empathy and openness: Practices of intersubjectivity at the core of the science of consciousness. The problem of consciousness. New essays in phenomenological philosophy of mind (E. Thompson ed.), Canadian Journal of Philosophy. Supplementary volume 29: 163–205.Google Scholar
  8. Depraz, N. 2005. L’éthique relationnelle: une pratique de la résonance inter-personnelle. Olivetti M. (ed). Le don et la dette. Milan: Cedam.Google Scholar
  9. Depraz, N., and F. Mauriac 2005. La résonance comme épochè éthique. Alter 13.Google Scholar
  10. Elkaïm, M. 1989. Si tu m’aimes, ne m’aime pas. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  11. Goldstein, K. 1995. The organism. New York: Zone books.Google Scholar
  12. Husserl, E. 1973. Zur Intersubjektivität. Husserliana XIII–XIV–XV.Google Scholar
  13. Kannas, S. et al. 2000. L’expérience d’un service mobile d’urgence psychiatrique (E.R.I.C.) à propos du risque de passage à l’acte des patients et de la sécurité des professionnels. Réflexions concernant le contexte et les aspects relationnels. Cahiers critiques de thérapie familiale et de pratiques de réseaux 24.Google Scholar
  14. Kern, I. 1962. Die drei Wege zur transzendentalphänomenologischen Reduktion in der Philosophie Edmund Husserls. Tijdschrift voor Filosofie 24.Google Scholar
  15. Larchet, J.C. 1996. La divinisation de l’homme selon saint Maxime le Confesseur. Paris: Cerf.Google Scholar
  16. Levine, J. 1983. Materialism and Qualia: The Explanatory Gap. Pacific Philosophical Quaterly 64: 354–361.Google Scholar
  17. Michard, P. 1991. De l’éthique intime. Groupe familial 133: 29–33.Google Scholar
  18. Petitmengin, C. 2009. Ten years of viewing from within. The legacy of Francisco Varela. Journal of Consciousness Studies 16(11–12): 285.Google Scholar
  19. Ricœur, P. 1990. Soi-même comme un autre. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  20. Robin, M., et al. 1998. Ethique pratique et situation de crise en psychiatrie. L’évolution psychiatrique 63(1–2): 227–234.Google Scholar
  21. Spiegelberg, H. 1995. Towards a phenomenology of imaginative understanding of others. Proceedings of the 11th international congress of philosophy. brussels VII: 232–239.Google Scholar
  22. Varela, F.J. 1996. Neurophenomenology: A methodological remedy to the hard problem. Journal of Consciousness Studies 3(4): 330–349.Google Scholar
  23. Varela F.J., and J. Shear 1999. The view from within. Journal of Consciousness Studies 6(2–3): 311.Google Scholar
  24. Varela, F.J., and N. Depraz 2000. At the source of time: Valence and the constitutional dynamics of affect. In Ipseity and alterity: Interdisciplinary approaches to intersubjectivity, eds. Gallagher S., Watson S. Rouen: Presses Universitaires de Rouen.Google Scholar
  25. Varela, F.J., and N. Depraz. 2003. Au cœur du temps: l’auto-antécédance II. Intellectica 36(37): 183–203.Google Scholar
  26. Wittezaele, J–.J. 2003. L’homme relationnel. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  27. Yannaras, Ch. 1983. La liberté de la morale. Genève: Labor et Fides.Google Scholar
  28. Yannaras, Ch. 1986. Philosophie sans rupture. Genève: Labor et Fides.Google Scholar
  29. Zizioulas, J. 1981. L’être ecclésial. Genève: Labor et Fides.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Center for Applied Epistemology (Paris)University of Rouen (E.R.I.A.C.) Husserl-Archives (ENS, Paris)RouenFrance

Personalised recommendations