Advertisement

Time and Formal Authenticity: Husserl and Heidegger

  • Robert Welsh Jordan
Part of the Contributions to Phenomenology book series (CTPH, volume 41)

Abstract

Husserl’s transcendental conception of the relation between time-constitution and immanent time was still very far off conceptually when he delivered the 1905 Time Lectures. The conceptual framework of his General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology 1 of 1913 maintains that the status of all mental processes (or lived experiences, Erlebnise) as occurring in the flux of immanent time is achieved through constitutive functions which cannot be authentically understood as occurring in time at all, even though they also are bound to be identified as occurring at the present moment in the constituted flux and the flux as occurring to and through the lived body and the lived body as belonging to the life-world. The flux is, therefore, necessarily intended as belonging to world-time. The flux of mental processes and immanent time itself, therefore, are constituted, and the syntheses through which they get constituted do not occur in the flux or in immanent time. Through such synthetic transcendental occurrences, the self makes itself be in time and in the world. Accordingly, the transcendental subject coincides only partially with the subject in the world, but it does so necessarily and can exist only by doing so, by “making” itself be in the world. If vast differences in nomenclature are overlooked, this later position is close in many ways to the one Martin Heidegger2 was developing when he was engaged in editing the 1905 lectures for their first publication.

Keywords

Immanent Time Collect Work Subjective Process Ontic State Formal Authenticity 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. 1.
    Edmund Husserl, Ideen zu einer Reinen Phänomenologie und Phänomenologischen Philosophie, Erstes Buch, Allgemeine Einführung in die Reine Phänomenologie, ed. Walter Biemel, Husserliana III (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1950). [Cited hereafter as Hua El; where the citation is by page number, the numbers will be followed in parentheses by the marginal pagination, which corresponds to the pagination of the original 1913 publication.] See especially §§81–86. English translation: Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. First Book, General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology, trans. Frederick I. Kersten (The Hague & Boston: M. Nijhoff, 1982). [Cited hereafter as Ideas, Book I]Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    It could and probably did serve as Heidegger’s point of departure though the positions probably are in the end different in several important particulars; see §§7–8 below.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Edmund Husserl, On the Phenomenology of the Consciousness of Internal Time (1893–1917), trans. John Barnett Brough, Edmund Husserl, Collected Works (English), vol. 4 (Dordrecht & Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991) [cited hereafter as Collected Works 4, where the citation is by page number, the numbers will be followed in parentheses by the marginal pagination, which corresponds to the pagination of Edmund Husserl, Zur Phänomenologie des inneren Zeitbewusstseins (1893–1917), ed. Rudolf Boehm, Husserliana X (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1966)—cited hereafter as Hua X].Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    When the word “Object” is spelled with an initial capital here and in the remainder of this essay, it corresponds to the German “Objekt” while it will correspond to Husserl’s „Gegenstand“ when spelled with lower case initial letter. All other nouns, verbs, etc. that are clearly related to these words will be treated in the same way orthographically. The two words are probably not quite interchangeable even in Husserl’s writing before 913. In Husserliana X and XXIV with which this and the next section will be principally concerned, as in the Logical Investigations and in most of Husserl’s writings, “Objektiverung” and related terms seem usually to refer to consciousness insofar as it takes the form of belief or of its various “modalities,” i.e., to what will come to be called “doxic” consciousness. “Vergegenständlichung” and its related terms seems on the other hand to refer to something that consciousness in all its forms, whether doxic or not, does.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Represented by vertical descending lines in the familiar diagram.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hua X: 369ff. (Collected Works 4: 380ff.).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    The ones that will be treated below are largely additional to those threats to coherence that arose from the incomplete editorial efforts that led to the 1928 publication. See John B. Brough’s “Translator’s Introduction” to Collected Works 4: XV.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    The passage occurs in the “Addenda and Supplements to the Analysis of Time-Consciousness from the years 1905–1910” Hua X: 296 (Collected Works 4: 307), which is a transcription made in 1917 or later after Edith Stein had begun to work on organizing and revising the manuscript. There seems to be a very good chance that the word was not in the manuscript itself which apparently is no longer extant. See the editor’s introductions to Collected Works 4 (Xïïff.) and Hua X (XIVfF.) The word also occurs quite without context and as a paragraph in its own right at 296.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hua X: 83 (Collected Works 4: 88).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hua X: 78 (Collected Works 4: 83).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hua X: 83 (Collected Works 4: 88 ).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    See especially Hua X: 296f. (Collected Works 4: 308). The passage is said by the editor, Rudolf Boehm, to belong to a group of manuscripts written between 1907 and 1909 [269 (Collected Works 4: 279) n. 1]. The intellectualistic error that is being traced here was partially corrected, however, in a lecture course of 1906–1907, published in Husserliana XXIV, as will be shown in §2 below.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hua X: 297 (Collected Works 4: 308).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hua X: 295ff. (Collected Works 4: 306ff.).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    See§3a below.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Supplement No. 41, Hua X: 292f. (Collected Works 4: 302ff.).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hua X: 296f. (Collected Works 4: 308).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Edmund Husserl, Einleitung in die Logik und Erkenntnistheorie: Vorlesungen 1906, ed. Ullrich Melle, Husserliana XXIV (Dordrecht & Boston: M. Nijhoff, 1984) [cited hereafter as Hua XXIV], 273.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    The difference is implicit in Descartes’s differentiation of clear from unclear perceiving. Attentiveness is both a necessary and a sufficient condition for a perceiving that was previously unclear (was obscure) to become clear. Being attended to is both a necessary and sufficient condition for something that is intuited in an unclear (obscure) way to come to have been intuited clearly. See René Descartes, Principles of Philosophy, Part I, Principle XLV, page 237 in Volume 1 of the translation by E. S. Haldane and G. R. T. Ross (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1931).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    See pages 13–18 below.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hua XXIV: 293.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ibid., 293f.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    ibid., 290f.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    ibid., 292.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
  26. 26.
    Huam: 196(161).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Edmund Husserl, Cartesianische Meditationen und Pariser Vorträge, ed. Stephen Strasser, Husserliana I (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1963), §18.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    To take a position [Stellungnahme] is the essential characteristic of what Husserl would call a performed or actualized thesis. [Hua III: 256].Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Genetically considered, the sort of “implicit” positing referred to here and in passing throughout this and the next two paragraphs appears not to be an eidetically necessary characteristic of all actional mental processes of various doxic and non-doxic kinds discussed in these paragraphs. Hence, it is not an eidetically necessary trait of all the monads in whom such processes occur. Instead, it is itself subjectively relative, varying, according to definite eidetic laws, depending upon the type of monad in whom the relevant actional mental process occurs. For this reason, it is ah eidetically necessary trait of any monad in whom it does in fact occur.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    This is how the ego acquires on the one hand an individual and eventually a personal history that changes only in the sense that the ego “grows older,” to use Schutz’s term, in such a way that all subsequent experience is synthetically unified and continuous with its already retended history and on the other hand an enduring but changeable character in something closely akin to the sense of Aristotle and John Stuart Mill (see Robert Welsh Jordan, “Husserl’s Phenomenology as an ‘Historical Science’” in Social Research 35 (1968), 245–259. Position-taking is what makes for human history.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Many passages suggest that Husserl held a different view. These list willing along with cognition and emotion as a class of subjective process. That the view being presented above nevertheless has Husserl’s authority is indicated when he writes (1 ), “every act aims at or intends a goal which is immanent to it and that it is intentionally directed toward. This goal is what we call the act-theme” and (2) that every striving and, therefore, every intention can take on the form of willing, i.e., the form of voluntary perceiving (observing), remembering, producing, valuing, etc.; see Edmund Husserl, Phänomenologische Psychologie, Vorlesungen Sommersemester 1925, ed. Walter Biemel, Husserliana Volume IX (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1962)—cited hereafter as Hua DC—411, 413, and Edmund Husserl, Vorlesungen über Ethik und Wertlehre, 1908–1914, ed. Ulrich Melle, Husserliana XXVIII (Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1988)—cited hereafter as Hua XXVIII— 112ff.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hua ÏÏT. 82 (66).Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    And every founded doxic act as well.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    ibid., 83.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
  36. 36.
    Husserl may well have had in mind here the possibility that a monad as a whole is unified by a single archontic thesis. In that case, he would probably follow Leibniz and Fichte in conceiving this ultimate, archontic thesis to be conative.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    A monad’s internal history and tradition would include the whole unity of its internal time, its automatic as well as its actional subjective processes.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    See Heidegger, Gesamtausgabe 24, 446f. (English 314).Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Edmund Husserl, Logische Untersuchungen. Zweiter Band, Zweiter Teil, Untersuchungen zur Phänomenologie und Theorie der Erkenntnis. Texte der 1. und der 2. Auflage ergänzt durch Annotationen und Beiblätter aus dem Hand Exemplar, ed. Ursula Panzer, Husserliana XIX/2 (The Hague, Boston, Lancaster: Martinus Nijhoff, 1984)—cited hereafter as Hua XIX/2 - 715 (6th Investigation § 61).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    The German is eigentlich and carries much the same meaning for Heidegger as it has here and in most other Husserlian contexts. The signification is elaborated in Husserliana IX, Appendix XI (1926), 412 n. 1; see also Chapters 3–5 of the 6th of the Logical Investigations (Hua XIX/2 596–656). The ego’s being-with-the-intentional-object [bei-dem-intentionalen-Gegenstand-sein] is ambiguous since its being-with may be either an unfulfilled anticipation or actually fulfilled. Being with in the mode of actual fulfillment is authentic being-with. Being-with in the anticipatory mode would then be inauthentic being-with. As long as any fulfillment at all is outstanding, an actus is anticipative and so is inauthentic. The passage to which this one is a marginal note explains that the ego’s being interested in objects is to be taken etymologically as interesse, i.e., to be in the midst of entities. The English Phenomenological Psychology. Lectures, Summer Semester, 1925, trans, John Scanlon, presents only the main text (234 pp.) of Husserliana IX and omits some 240 pages of important supplements and appendices not otherwise available in English, including Appendix XLGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hua XXIV: 274.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Misinterpretations, inauthentic explications (false statements, miscounting, invalid reasoning, etc.) would seem to generate members of the class of inauthentic, merely subject-relative objective traits. Though Jones falsely believes the night of May 29, 1984 to have been a night when black stealth helicopters hovered over his home, it still remains true of his home that it is inhabited by someone who believed it to have been subject to that sort of surveillance. Such explications generate a unity belonging not to the world but to the absolutely inclusive class, the class of all objects, which necessarily includes itself.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    A number of Husserl’s texts written prior to 1913 seem to indicate commitment to such a dualism. A prime example is found in Husserliana XXIV (244–247). On the other hand, the same lecture course goes on to demonstrate—as was shown above—that pre-Objective forms of temporal and spatial extension are given with the very impressions themselves. And similar points are made in the lectures on “Thing and Space” of 1907 (Hua XVI).Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Phenomenology proper would exclude in that case the corruption of Alfred Schutz’s work that seems sometimes to occur when it is rendered into English; this happens, for example, in the following passage with disastrous effect. SCHUTZ: Das erlebende Ich erlebt die Erlebnisse seiner Dauer nicht als wohlumgrenzte und daher isolierte Einheiten, wenngleich es sie as solche in den reflexiven Blick zu bringen fähig ist. [Alfred Schutz, Dersinnhafte Aufbau der sozialen Welt. Eine Einleitung in die verstehende Soziologie, second, unaltered edition (Vienna: Springer, 1960) 78f.]. TRANSLATORS: We have already exposed the fallacy that intended meaning is an isolated lived experience (Erlebnis). As long as consciousness remains a pure stream of duration, there are no discrete lived experiences. [Alfred Schutz, The Phenomenology of the Social World, trans. George Walsh and Frederick Lehnert (Northwestern University Press, 1967) 75]. The empahsis in the German text is Schutz’s.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    “Reveals” is the term used by the Mcquarrie-Robinson as well as the Stambaugh translation of Being and Time to render Heidegger’s enthüllt, for which A. Hofstadter employs “unveils” in translating The Basic Problems of Phenomenology.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hua m: 297f. (25If.).Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hua HI: 293 (246).Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    The extension has the authority of Husserl himself in comments of 1916 on the passage under discussion. See Hua DI, Appendix XXDI, 41 Of.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    (Hua DI: 295 (248).Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hua XXVul: 83.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hua m: 291 (244f.) and §147 and Hua XDC/2: 26ff.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Edmund Husserl, Analysen zur Passiven Synthesis aus Vorlesungs- und Forschungsmanuskripten (1918–1926), ed. Margot Fleischer, Husserliana XI (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1966) [hereafter cited as Hua XI], 102ff. (see also 446). The passage indicates that Husserl did indeed seriously question the positivistic assumption of traditional logic that all judgments are “decidable”. However, it did not appear in print until 1966 and so was not available to Suzanne Bachelard in 1957 when she asserted the opposite (A Study of Husserl’s Formal and Transcendental Logic, trans. Lester Embree [Evanston, Illinois; Northwestern University Press, 1968], 128–129). On the other hand, Bachelard did overlook some passages in Formal and Transcendental Logic that weigh heavily against her claim, such as the one quoted immediately below.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Edmund Husserl, Formale und Transzendentale Logik, ed. Paul Janssen, Husserliana XVÏÏ (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1974), 203f. English translation: Formal and Transcendental Logic, trans. Dorion Cairns (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1969), 196 (marginal: 174).Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Hua X: 296 (307).Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Hua XDC/2: 655ff. (Sixth Investigation § 39).Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Compare Robert Welsh Jordan, „Das transzendentale Ich als Seiendes in der Welt,“ Perspektiven der Philosophie, 5. Band (Amsterdam: Editions Rodopi, 1979), 201–205.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Hua XI: 43.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    ibid., 42.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Although world exists only insofar as Dasein exists by fore-casting a world [The Basic Problems of Phenomenology, trans. Albert Hofstadter (Bloomington and Indianapolis, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1988), 168 (237f. in Die Grundprobleme der Phänomenologie (Marburg lectures of the summer semester 1927), ed. F.-W. Von Herrmann, Gesamtausgabe 24 (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1975)], what Heidegger calls “nature” does not require that there be a world or Dasein [ibid., 175 (249)].Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Basic Problems 166, 270, 296f. (Gesamtausgabe 24, 236f., 383, 420ff.).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Welsh Jordan
    • 1
  1. 1.Colorado State UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations