• Jan M. Broekman


The concept of attitude is the product of a debate on psychologism during the first years of the twentieth century: the theory that all philosophical issues are in essence a matter of the human psyche and its power of decision making. Attitude appears to be pivotal in phenomenology and a central philosophical theme in the case of meaning. The intellectual climate of the concept is researched in this chapter; its roots appear in German literature of the eighteenth century, and attitude became a key-component of Edmund Husserl’s ideas. Originally a differentiation between a naïve- and a non-naïve attitude, the concept became decisive in understanding language layers, which were producing either naïve-natural or non-naïve-natural levels of linguistic articulation essential for meaning. This determined the method and content of Husserl’s phenomenology and Peirce’s pragmatism as well as his theory of signs. The two have in this chapter an extended conversation via Skype, which uniquely clarifies differences and common ideas on the foundations of meaning. The law student will in the last section learn the relevance of these ideas for law and legal discourse, in which attitude changes should be trained.


Attitude Change Natural Attitude Human Psyche Meaning Making Legal Education 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Adorno, Th.W. 1956. Zur Metakritik der Erkenntnistheorie. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  2. Bernouw, Jeffrey. 1988. Aesthetic for Schiller and Peirce, A neglected origin of pragmatism. Journal of the History of Ideas 49: 4, University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  3. Breda, H.L. van. 1959. La Technique Phénoménologique, Discussion. In: HUSSERL: Cahiers de Royaumont, No. 111, Editions de Minuit, Paris.Google Scholar
  4. Broekman, Jan M. 1963. Phänomenologie und Egologie, M. Nijhoff, Den Haag, Series Phaenomenologica Bd 12.Google Scholar
  5. Broekman, Jan M. 2010. Firstness and phenomenology. In Prospects of legal semiotics, ed. Wagner Anne and M. Broekman. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Broekman, Jan M. 2013. The emancipation of meaning: Sign, meaning, norm. In Positivität, Normativität und Institutionalität des Rechts. Festschrift für Werner Krawietz zum 80. Geburtstag, ed. C.S. Aarnio. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  7. Buber, Martin. 1923. Ich und Du. Leipzig: Insel Verlag.Google Scholar
  8. Colapietro, Vincent M. 1989. Peirce’s approach to the self, A semiotic perspective on human subjectivity. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  9. de Haan, J.I. 1916. The essence and task of legal significs. In Signs in law—A source book, ed. Jan M. Broekman and Larry Catá Backer. Springer.Google Scholar
  10. de Haan, J.I. 1916. Rechtskundige Significa. Amsterdam: W. Versluys.Google Scholar
  11. Derrida, Jacques. 1972. Marges de la Philosophie. Paris: Minuit.Google Scholar
  12. Ghosh, Peter. 2014. Max Weber and “The Protestant Ethic”. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hardwick, Charles S. (ed.). 1977. Semiotic and significs: The correspondence between Charles S. Peirce and Victoria Lady Welby (Assistance of James Cook). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Heinemann, F. 1959. Schicksal und Aufgabe der Philosophie im Zwanzigsten Jahrhundert” [Fate and Task of Philosophy in the 20th Century]. In Die Philosophie im XX. Jahrhundert [Philosophy in the XX. Century]. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Verlag.Google Scholar
  15. Husserl, Edmund. 1913. Logische Untersuchungen. Prolegomena zur reinen Logik [Logical Investigations. Prolegomena for a Pure Logic], 1900, 2nd ed, Max Niemeyer, Halle.Google Scholar
  16. Husserl, Edmund. 1929. Formale und transzendentale Logik—Versuch einer Kritik der Logischen Vernunft [Formal and transcendental Logic—a Critique of Logical Reason] Max Niemeyer, Halle.Google Scholar
  17. Husserl, Edmund. 1950. Die Idee der Phänomenologie. W. Biemel (ed.), M. Nijhoff, Den Haag.Google Scholar
  18. Husserl, Edmund. 1956. Erste Pilosophie—Erster Teil: Kritische Ideengeschichte [First Philosophy – Vol. I: Critical History of Ideas], ed. M. Nijhoff and R. Boehm, Husserliana vol. VII, M. Nijhoff, Den Haag.Google Scholar
  19. Husserl, Edmund. 1959. Erste Philosophie. Zweiter Teil: Theorie der phänomenologischen Reduktion [First Philosophy, Vol. II: Theory of the Phenomenological Reduction], ed. R. Boehm, Husserliana vol. VIII, M. Nijhoff, The Hague.Google Scholar
  20. Husserl, Edmund. 1970. Die Krisis der Europäischen Wissenschaften und die Transzendentale Phänomenologie, M. Nijhoff, Den Haag 1954, Husserliana Bd. VI [The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Philosophy (trans.: Carr, D.)]Google Scholar
  21. Husserl, Edmund. 1982. Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie [Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy – First Book: General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology, [1913]. (trans.: Kersten, F.) The Hague: M. Nijhoff].Google Scholar
  22. Husserl, Edmund. 1987. Vorlesungen über Bedeutungslehre, Sommersemester 1908. (U. Panzer, Ed.) [Lectures on Theory of Meaning, Summer Semester 1908] Husserliana Bd. XXVI, M. Nijhoff, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  23. Jung, C. G. 1971. Psychologische Typen, Zürich 1921 [Eng: Psychological Types, London].Google Scholar
  24. Katz, Daniel. 1960. The functional approach to the study of attitudes, Public Opinion Quarterly 24: 173.Google Scholar
  25. Lalande, André. 1951. Vocabulaire technique et critique de la philosophie, 6th ed. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  26. Latour, Bruno. 2013. An inquiry into modes of existence. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Levinas, Emmanual. 1959. La technique phénoménologique, Discussion. In HUSSERL: Cahiers de Royaumont; No. 111, Editions de Minuit, Paris.Google Scholar
  28. MacEachren, A.M. 2004. How maps work. Representation, visualization, and design. New York/London: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  29. Pamuk, Orhan. 2010. The naïve and the sentimental novelist. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Parker, Kelly A. 1998. The continuity of Peirce’s thought. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Peirce Edition Project. 1998. The essential Peirce. Selected philosophical writings, 2 vols. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Petrilli, Susan. 2013. The self as a sign, the world, and the other. New Brunswick/London: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
  33. Reiss, Hans. 1978. The writer’s task from Nietzsche to Brecht. London: McMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schmücker, F.G. 1956. Die Phänomenologie als Methode der Wesenserkenntnis unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Auffassung der Münchner-Göttinger Phänomenologenschule, [Phenomenology as a Method to Acquire Knowledge about Essence in the Particular Views of the School of Phenomenologists in Munich and Göttingen] Gruenewald, München.Google Scholar
  35. Spiegelberg, Herbert. 1956. Husserl’s and Peirce’s phenomenologies: Coincidence or interaction. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 17: 164–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Staude, Martin. 2013. Meaning in communication, cognition, and reality. Exeter: Imprint Academic.Google Scholar
  37. Stjernfelt, Frederik. 2007. Diagrammatology. An investigation on the borderlines of phenomenology, ontology, and semiotics. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  38. Stjernfeldt, Frederik. 2014. Natural propositions. The actuality of Peirce’s doctrine of dicisigns. Boston: Docent Press.Google Scholar
  39. Szondi, Peter. 1978. Das Naïve ist das Sentimentalische. Zur Begriffsdialektik in Schillers Abhandlung [The Naïve is the Sentimental. On the Conceptual Dialectics of Schillers Essay]. In Lektüren und Lektionen [Readings and Lectures] in: Schriften II [Writings II], Suhrkamp, Frankfurt/M.Google Scholar
  40. von Schiller, F. 1795–1796. Über naïve und sentimentalische Dichtung. Essays separately published in the Journal DIE HOREN.Google Scholar
  41. Whorf, B.L. 1940. Science and linguistics. Technology Review 42(6): 229–231.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan M. Broekman
    • 1
  1. 1.Penn State LawUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations