Skip to main content

Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Hedwig Conrad-Martius

Part of the book series: Women in the History of Philosophy and Sciences ((WHPS,volume 8))

  • 82 Accesses

Abstract

The Introduction presents what has been largely absent from the discussions in the various chapters: HCM’s personal background and the social and philosophical contexts of her thought. In addition, the Introduction addresses crucial aspects for understanding the hermeneutic dimensions involved in specific issues that addressed in the book. However, in the introduction special emphasis has been given to the mutual influences of the early phenomenologists. Thus, HCM’s ideas are discussed in the Introduction along with those of Husserl, Reinach, Geiger, Pfänder, Stein, von Hildebrand, and Spiegelberg. At the same time, the fascinating phenomenon whereby often the ideas of one member of the Circle were explained and further developed by other members reveals the group nature as a philosophical characteristic, which thus transpires as a key for the interpretation of early phenomenology in general.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The literature suggests two options regarding the places of HCM’s birth and death. Except for Hart, who reports that she was born in Königsberg (Hart, 1973, 14), all other sources indicate Berlin. There also appears to be disagreement regarding the place of her death. The majority (and most probable) position indicates Munich, while a few sources (Wikipedia.de included) note it as Starnberg. Martha Martius, HCM’s mother, composed a family chronicle in four volumes in which she described both the positive and negative sides of her six children (HCM was the third), who were rather different from each other. Martha Martius’ grandchild, Goetz-Alexander, published some sections from this chronicle (Martius, 2002, 2003a), which has also been published as a book (Martius, 2003b).

  2. 2.

    In his speech from 27 February 1958 for HCM’s 70th birthday, Avé-Lallemant indicted that “HCM” was Conrad-Martius’ nickname among her pupils at the University of Munich. See: Avé-Lallemant, 1959b, 24.

  3. 3.

    This source is a first publication of the text of HCM’s acceptance speech (to be referred to later in the body text) (HCM, 1958bN). It contains the original German text (HCM, 2015a, 56–59) and its translation into English by Ferrarello (HCM, 2015b, 60–63), which also added an introduction (Ferrarello, 2015, 51–55). See references to the speech in: Ursula Avé-Lallemant (1965/1966, 207), Pfeiffer (2005, 49).

  4. 4.

    All translations from the German original into English are mine. Emphases follow the original unless stated otherwise. In cases of unique terms or phrases and unusual usage, the original German is included in parentheses. I have attempted to maintain consistency in the translations I offer. However, at times, certain contexts have obliged me to choose a different English phrase for the same word in German. Undoubtedly, HCM’s unique vocabulary and her solecisms have frequently necessitated the inclusion of the German term in parentheses. Regarding other German sources, in particular the writings of Edmund Husserl and Adolf Reinach, the text refers to English translations of the German sources, where available. In light of the many sources mentioned, and in order to assist the readers, a system of abbreviations is employed. This system is listed alongside each item in the References section at the end of each chapter and at the end of the book. For convenience, I have avoided using the abbreviation ibid, and I have repeated the abbreviation with each reference.

  5. 5.

    This citation is taken from a photograph of the newspaper cutting that is stored in Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich and cataloged under the title Zeitungsveröffentlischungen zur Preisschrift 1912.

  6. 6.

    In 1903, HCM enrolled in the Gymnasialkurse für Frauen at the Helene Lange School in Berlin, and in fall 1907/1908 she received her Abitur at the Sophien-Realgymnasium in Berlin.

  7. 7.

    In WS 1907/8, HCM enrolled in the Faculty of Philosophy at the University of Rostock and spent three semesters attending courses in philosophy and German Studies. In SS 1908 (one semester), she studied philology at the University of Freiburg. In 1908–1909, she returned to Rostock for two more semesters (WS = winter semester; SS = summer semester). Avé-Lallemant refers to HCM’s writing of fine literature, yet he adds that “later she burned her own poetic and dramatic attempts” (Avé-Lallemant, 1984, 212). Avé-Lallemant also testified that after her religious experiences at the beginning of the 1920s (concomitant with Stein, to be discussed below), HCM had a big auto-da-fé and in 1929 she burned also her poetic writings from her time at Bad Bergzabern. Nonetheless, a copy of two valuable manuscripts survived. For this study of particular importance is: HCM 1916aN (cited from: Avé-Lallemant, 2015, 79 n. 45).

  8. 8.

    The notes in this volume were composed by the editor, Andreas Uwe Müller.

  9. 9.

    In October of 1909, HCM transferred to the University of Munich, where she studied philosophy with Max Scheler and Moritz Geiger. She remained there for two semesters (WS 1909/10 and SS 1910). During her first semester in Munich, HCM enrolled in courses with Max Scheler and with professors who were the students of Theodor Lipps, in particular Ernst von Aster (1880–1948) and Aloys Fischer (1880–1937).

  10. 10.

    In Rostock, she participated in an advanced seminar on Spinoza’s Ethics with her Professor, Franz Bruno Erhardt. Later she would describe her encounter with Spinoza as her first experience of being “hit by lightning” See: HCM (2015b, 61).

  11. 11.

    Fréchette suggests that in 1905, two groups of philosophers in Munich can be largely distinguished (Fréchette, 2012, 156–157). One, whose members remained largely faithful to Theodore Lipps and included August Gallinger, Aloys Fischer, Fritz Weinmann, and Max Ettlinger. See here also: Smid (1982, 114–115), Schuhmann (1973, 128–132). The second group included Theodor Conrad, Johannes Daubert, Adolf Reinach, and Moritz Geiger. Fréchette characterized them as “already showing more than a mere interest in phenomenology and it progressively abandoned most of the Lippsean conceptions” (Fréchette, 2012, 156).

  12. 12.

    Hart indicates that according to Ludwig Maximillian, in Munich the seminar was on Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, see: Hart (2020, 2 n. 3).

  13. 13.

    A similar testimony of this striking experience that took place as HCM first encountered Husserl’s phenomenology appears in Avé-Lallemant’s Habilitation. It documents a conversation Avé-Lallemant conducted with her on the occasion of her 70th birthday at Munich University. The conversation (in manuscript) was stored in the Munich Archive. See Avé-Lallemant (1971, 212 n. 1).

  14. 14.

    Ferrarello details the courses delivered by Husserl and Reinach between WS 1910/11 and SS 1912 that HCM attended in Göttingen. In the WS 1910/11, she attended Husserl’s following courses: “logic as a theory of cognition” (Logik als Theorie der cognition), “Basic Problems of Phenomenology”, and “Philosophical Exercises in connection of David Hume’s Tractatus ‘On the Human Spirit’” and Adolf Reinach’s “Kant’s Critique of Reason”. In SS 1911, she attended Husserl’s “Basic Problems of Ethics and Theory of Values” and “Philosophical Exercises with connections with Ernst Mach” along with Reinach’s “Philosophical Exercises: Selected Problems of Present Philosophy”. In the WS 1911/12, she attended Husserl’s “Kant and the Post-Kantian Philosophy”, and “Philosophical Exercises in Connection with Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason” and Reinach’s “Freedom of the Will, Attributions and Responsibility” (Ferrarello, 2015, 52 n. 1). See here also Schuhmann’s report of the courses Husserl delivered in Göttingen. See: Schuhmann (1977, 67–198).

  15. 15.

    HCM’s exceptional talent was well-known among her family members, even many years after her death. See, for example, the report of Hueglin, the grandson of HCM’s younger sister, Helene: “Her [Helene’s] sister Hedwig Conrad-Martius had gone through life as an independent philosopher and university teacher, and her brother was a famous gynecologist and author of numerous scientific treatises and textbooks. Many around my grandmother were certain that she could have been the brightest star of them all” (Hueglin, 2010, 108).

  16. 16.

    During her first period in Munich, HCM was involved in the related society, see: Feldes (2015, 20–22), Fréchette (2012). Apart from HCM, four more women were involved in the society: Margarete Calinich, Frau Dieltrich, Frau Dr. Ortner, and Katharine Tischendorf (indicated in the list of members from Maximilian Beck’s estate in the Bavarian State Archive [BSM]) (signature: Ana 354 D. II. 1), cited from: Hart (2020, 2 n. 4). The society was established in 1895 by Theodor Lipps and later operated by his students and assistants. Walther’s addendum of “philosophy” to the name of the society (Akademische Verein für Psychologie und Philosophie) (see: Walther, 1960, 379) mirrors its origin in “the Munich psychological school” (Die Münchener psychologische Schule) and its declared objective of “scientific engagement with psychological questions and the philosophical [questions] included in it” (cited from: Smid, 1982, 114).

  17. 17.

    In Göttingen, the group met Husserl’s and Reinach’s students, among which were Wilhelm Schapp, Karl Neuhaus, Alfred von Sybel, Alexander Rosenblum, Dietrich Mahnke, Heinrich Hofmann, David Katz, and Erich Heinrich.

  18. 18.

    Maria Amata Neyer and E. Av-Lallemant noted that also Johanes Daubert (1887–1947) was “an important mediator between the Munich phenomenological circle and Husserl” (Stein, 2001, 151 n. 5; 2005, 204 n. 5; most references to this source use the English translation). The students’ admiration for Reinach is also indicated in the obituary Husserl composed about him after he fell during the First World War (16 November 1917). The obituary first appeared in the daily newspaper Frankfurter Zeitung (6 December 1917) (see: Husserl, 1917/1987a). Subsequently to Husserl’s transcendental turn (to be discussed below), it was Reinach’s philosophy on which the Munich phenomenologists relied. Spiegelberg argues that “independently of each other, the Göttingen students of phenomenology […] in their accounts of this period refer to Reinach, not to Husserl as their teacher in Phenomenology. […]”. It was his [Reinach’s] “death in action in 1917 rather than Husserl’s going to Freiburg which cut short not only his own promise but that of the Göttingen phenomenological Circle” (Spiegelberg, 1984, 191–192). After Reinach’s death, his students published his writings, and HCM wrote two introductions to his essays. See: HCM (1921b, 1951b).

  19. 19.

    See here also: Husserl (1919/1987b/1983) (English translation).

  20. 20.

    This statement by HCM echoed in the research literature. See: Spiegelberg (1960, 195/1984, 192), Schuhmann and Smith (1987, 16/1989, 618), Feldes (2015, 55).

  21. 21.

    Cited from: Smid (1982, 112).

  22. 22.

    See here also: Spiegelberg (1959, 60).

  23. 23.

    Likewise, Theodor Conrad described them as “the oldest group” (cited from: Feldes, 2013, 206) and Alexander Koyré referred to them as “the ‘old people’” (Stein, 2001, 144; 2005, 193).

  24. 24.

    In this context, see Spiegelberg’s discussion of the three generations of phenomenology, including his characteristics of the members of the first generation, which included the members of the Munich and Göttingen circle (Spiegelberg, 1985). Spiegelberg posits that regarding the significance of a generation in philosophy, “Here the decisive criterion would be the relation not between child, parent and grandparent etc., but the analogous one between a student—his teacher and his teacher’s teacher etc.” (Spiegelberg, 1985, 252).

  25. 25.

    Avé-Lallemant suggests dividing the phenomenologists in this period into three groups, which maintained mutual relations and were connected to Husserl before the first world war: (1) The real Munich group, including: Pfänder, Daubert, and Geiger; (2) The Munich-Göttingen group, including Reinach and Theodor Conrad, and later also Wilhelm Schapp, Jean Héring, Alexander Koyré, Hans Lipps, Hedwig Conrad-Martius, Roman Ingarden, Dietrich von Hildebrand, Edith Stein, Fritz Kaufmann, and Adolf Grimme; (3) Max Scheler’s group, which had a counter-influence of the two previous groups (Avé-Lallemant, 1975a, 23). See here also: Schmücker (1956).

  26. 26.

    The related Society was chaired by Theodor Conrad up to the summer semester of 1912, with breaks, during which his place was filled by HCM (SS 1911, WS 1911–1912) and Hildebrand. Feldes describes this group as constantly admitting new members, who later composed the group that became known as the Munich-Göttingen Group. In this context, see also: Avé-Lallemant and Schuhmann (1992), Feldes (2015, 30–32).

  27. 27.

    In this context, see a similar testimony given to Edith Stein. Dr. Georg Moskiewicz (1883–1955), who studied with Husserl in Göttingen and was very close to him, said: “In Göttingen, they only philosophized—day and night, about the essence, in the street and everywhere. They spoke only about ‘phenomena’”. This testimony is cited in: Avé-Lallemant (1988, 70). For HCM’s approach to animals and plants, see: HCM, 1939; 1941 [1939].

  28. 28.

    These words are taken from Reinach’s best-known text, based on a lecture he gave at Marburg in January 1914. The German original of the lecture was published twice (Reinach, 1921b/1951) and received two English translations (Reinach, 1968, 1969). The related ethos, to be acknowledged later also by Husserl (Husserl, 1970b, §47 163; Husserl, 1976, §47 166) is further discussed later in this chapter.

  29. 29.

    However, regarding the similarity of phenomenology to the sciences, Spiegelberg wonders “what was to be the place of phenomenology, then, in such a framework?” (Spiegelberg, 1960, 196/1984, 193). In any event, he establishes that “compared with the intensity and vitality of the philosophizing that went on in these two circles during the ten years of the ‘phenomenological spring’ (as Jean Hering has called it), the later Phenomenological Movement, though richer in literary output, seems to be almost shapeless and anemic” (Spiegelberg 1960, 168–169/1984, 166). Likewise, Seifert emphasizes the uniqueness of the Munich phenomenology as a philosophical occurrence that has no equivalent in the history of modern philosophy. See: Seifert (1971, 97).

  30. 30.

    Reinach’s letter is mentioned also in: Smid (1982, 116), Fréchette (2012, 150).

  31. 31.

    Husserl’s Ideas first appeared in the first volume of Husserl’s Yearbook (Husserl, 1913).

  32. 32.

    The research literature generally identifies the ontological-formal starting point with Logical Investigations, while the shift to an idealistic-transcendental position is identified with the publication of the first volume of his Ideas in 1913, where this position appeared in writing (see: Husserl, 1952/2012a). However, later in life, HCM reached an understanding that what she called “Husserl’s incomprehensible retreat to transcendentalism, to subjectivism, if not to psychologism” occurred “already in volume 2 of Logical Investigations” (HCM, 1965b, 395). Avé-Lallemant also indicated the gap between the two volumes of Logical Investigations. See Avé-Lallemant (1971, 14ff.). Avé-Lallemant shares this view about Logical Investigations with Spiegelberg, who observed that the two volumes designated two periods in Husserl’s Phenomenology (the pre-phenomenological and the period of phenomenology), see: Spiegelberg (1960, 74/1984, 70). In any case, Husserl himself testified that in 1905, already at his time in Göttingen he “first executed the phenomenological reduction” (Husserl, 2002b, 315). See also Husserl (1966 [Seefelder Manuskripte über Individualtion (1905–1907)], 237–268), Heffernan (2018/2016), Nakhnikian (1964), Seifert (20042005, 146f.).

  33. 33.

    The proposed simile of peripeteia follows Aristotle’s Poetics. While the peripeteiac moment is described as sudden, its roots are planted in the circumstances of preceding events. HCM herself used this simile in connection to Being and Time. See: HCM (1965e, 371). HCM employs this simile also in her theological discussions. See: HCM (1965d, 189; 1965j, 222; 1965k, 196).

  34. 34.

    Kuhn testified to the “long painful lack of teaching activity” (Kuhn, 1966).

  35. 35.

    This directly disproves Spiegleberg’s statement that HCM submitted her doctoral dissertation in Munich with Pfänder and not in Göttingen with Husserl “for technical reasons” (Spiegelberg, 1985, 252). In fact, both statements, regarding the affiliation and regarding the identity of the supervisor, are incorrect. Husserl did not directly supervise HCM in writing her dissertation, and this was not “for technical reasons”, as it transpires HCM was well-aware. Spiegelberg’s statement, written in the USA, where he had emigrated, is tainted with blindness toward the difficulties HCM faced in the period where very few women even tried to write dissertations, let alone be considered for tenured academic positions.

  36. 36.

    See Karl Schuhmann’s editorial comment on Husserl’s letter to Theodor Conrad on 21 July 1912, where he wrote that “for technical reasons she [HCM] was promoted with this essay but not by Husserl rather by Pfänder in Munich” (Husserl, 1994a, 16).

  37. 37.

    One wonders how Husserl, who, according to HCM was “delighted” by her winning the prize (HCM, 2015b, 62), was unable to influence her admission to the Philosophy Department at Göttingen University, where he was a senior professor. Also, Hart supports HCM’s impression and indicates that: “Husserl was willing to accept the work for a doctorate at Goettingen”, Hart (1972, 12 n. 1). However, it is still difficult to accept this state of affairs at face value.

  38. 38.

    The first part of the dissertation, “The Entire Phenomenon of the Real External World” (HCM, 1916, 345–397), is based on the first chapter of the “prize essay”. The second part of the dissertation “Sensory Givenness: Feeling and Appearing” (HCM, 1916, 397–542) is entirely new and anticipates the subsequent book, Realontologie (HCM, 1923b).

  39. 39.

    Avé-Lallemant testified that the plan to adapt the remaining chapters of the Prize Essay was never realized. See Avé-Lallemant (1971, 213).

  40. 40.

    During these weeks, HCM was in Munich, and not as Spiegelberg wrote: “her main work having been done at Gottingen” (Spiegelberg, 1985, 253).

  41. 41.

    The understanding of becoming a phenomenologist almost as an innate givenness is repeated by several phenomenologists. In this spirit, as we have seen, Husserl characterized Reinach: “The phenomenological mode of thinking and investigation soon became second nature to him” (Husserl, 1983, xii; 1987b, 301). Stein referred to those who “were born phenomenologists” (Stein, 2013, 6) and HCM maintained that the phenomenologists “as [naturally] born out of a common spirit” (HCM, 1960b, 62).

  42. 42.

    HCM was the first woman to be promoted in a German university. This was in 1912, by Alexander Pfänder, on the basis of her prize essay. See Stein (2013, 7 n. 10).

  43. 43.

    Husserl’s Yearbook (Jahrbuch für Phänomenologie and philosophische Forschung) that was published between 1913 and 1930 and contained eleven issues in which the most foundational works ever in phenomenology were published, such as Husserl’s first volume of Ideen (Husserl, 1913) and Heidegger’s Sein und Zeit (Heidegger, 1927). So far, Schuhmann has written the only article to date that is wholly dedicated to Husserl’s Yearbook (Schuhmann, 1990). However, a few references to the Yearbook have appeared here and there. Thus, for example, Spiegelberg states that while the development of phenomenology, including in Germany, usually happened in circles, they “had better be described as clusters”. In contrast, the co-editors of the Yearbook created a “more definite and stable ‘nucleus’” (Spiegelberg, 1984, 4). See also ibid., 158 n. 88; 241. Anna-Teresa Thmieniecka also stresses the Yearbook’s importance to the historical development of phenomenology, describing it as such that “served as the medium in which the most important advances in the new philosophical field of phenomenology saw the light of day. When in 1930 the Jahrbuch came to an untimely end, phenomenology had lost its central organ of communication” (Tymieniecka, 1970, v). Later, three journals sought to make phenomenology accessible to English readers, declaring themselves explicitly as successors of the historical Yearbook, and noting this unmistakably in their titles. The first was Journal of Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, whose first issue appeared in 1940, edited by Marvin Farber. Schuhmann would later write that “Farber’s title implied that the new journal was to continue Husserl’s famous Jahrbuch fur Philosophie und phänomenologische Forschung, the last volume of which had been published only a decade earlier” (Schuhmann, 1990, 1). The second appeared from 1970, entitled Analecta Husserliana—The Yearbook of Phenomenological Research (ANHU), edited by Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka. In the introduction to the first issue, she described it explicitly as “The reviving of Husserl’s own Jahrbuch” (Tymieniecka, 1970, VII). 2001 saw the first publication of The New Yearbook for Phenomenolgy and Phenomenological Philosophy (NYPPP). The editors, Burt Hopkins and Steven Crowell, deliberately chose the orignal name (with the addition of the word New), and described it as a journal that “will provide an annual international forum for phenomenology and phenomenological philosophy in the spirit of Edmund Husserl’s groundbreaking work” (Hopkins & Crowerll, 2001, front page).

  44. 44.

    Only in 1920 was the prize essay published by a private press. It is possible that the delay in publishing this treatise, and also perhaps its publication by a marginal press, contributed to the connection between it and HCM’s doctoral dissertation not being known. Many of the chapters in this volume are devoted to the interpretation of this complex essay, which is packed with the important elements of HCM’s entire philosophy, including her later thought.

  45. 45.

    Gerda Walther also described the difficulties women encountered when seeking to enter the university’s lecture halls. See: Walther (1960, 17).

  46. 46.

    The couple moved first to Theodor’s mother in the Southern Palatinate, close to the French border. Theodor Conrad was a professor of Philosophy in Munich and belonged to the older Göttingen students of Husserl. Among the members of the Munich Circle, Theodor Conrad’s nickname was Autós (“self” in Greek), inspired by his self-assurance. See: Stein (1960, 1993, 149 n. 2) (letter no. 146 to Theodor Conrad). In the circle of her friends, HCM’s nickname was Hatti. Stein uses Hatti for HCM quite systematically, in particular in: See: Stein (2001, 147 n. 3; 2005, 198 n. 3).

  47. 47.

    Stein testified that HCM “has worked well beyond her strength in the farm” and therefore she planned to go and help her there (Stein, 2001, 140; 2005, 187). Walther, who was invited to the orchard farm in 1923, found as an “accurate description” the impression HCM gave Walther’s relative: “completely not an abstract thinker” but by means of “nice little apples […] a seminal philosopher” (Walther, 1960, 331–332).

  48. 48.

    An essay on the soul that preceded Metaphysische Gespräche was later included in it (HCM, 1917, 26–86). Stein was utterly impressed by Realontologie (Stein, 2001, 139–140; 2005, 188) and by Metaphysische Gespräche as well (Stein, 2001, 145–147; 2005, 196–197). However, Stein reports that Ingarden expressed a “vehement reaction to the book” and “fear for phenomenology” due to the metaphysical and religious tone that he found in it, see: Stein (2001, 145–146; 2005, 196).

  49. 49.

    See: HCM (1933, 1934, 1938, 1963f). The common discourse of HCM’s time often suggested a philosophy of natural sciences from the standpoint of human studies and in this regard communicated the philosophical project of Wilhelm Dilthey (see in particular: Stein, 2010; Husserl, 1976/1970b). However, beside her realistic phenomenology, HCM consolidated a philosophy of nature in the most strict and classical sense that also manifested the spirit of German romanticism. Hart suggests that her “early and deep interest in nature owed much to her father who was a famous botanist” (Hart, 1973, 14). Also, Ales Bello argued that HCM’s “interest in nature is also bound with her personal experience” (Ales Bello, 2002, 210).

  50. 50.

    The Conrads continued to own their apartment in Munich, where they visited frequently even after their move to Bergzabern. However, following financial difficulties, the apartment was sold in 1919 (Feldes, 2013, 210). The mutual assistance among the circle’s members was reflected by one of the members, Alfred von Sybel, handling the sale. The words of encouragement he sent the couple in this context show that the Conrads’ home in Munich was a significant place for the circle’s members. In a letter dated 12 September 1919, he wrote: “It is very sad that the Munich apartment now is not anymore. But meanwhile the orchard house grows, and this is actually much more beautiful” (cited from: Feldes, 2013, 210).

  51. 51.

    Feldes (2013, 205), Hart (2020, 4).

  52. 52.

    Only Stein’s letters were published. See: Stein (2005a, 20061993), Stein (20012005b). From the correspondence of the Bergzabern circle in HCM’s estate, her letter to Hering (HCM, 1955aN), as well as letters she received from him (Hering, 19141965N) and from Alexandre Koyré (Koyré, 19111964N), are preserved. The importance granted to letters at the time is articulated in Stein’s following words: “man’s life lies in his letters […] not only for the interest of biography, but for arriving at the inside of things” (Stein, 1993, ix).

  53. 53.

    Feldes discussed the origin of the name “Bergzabern Circle”: Feldes (2015, 9–10).

  54. 54.

    Feldes published the only study, so far, on von Sybel (see: Feldes, 2013).

  55. 55.

    For an account of the society, see: Feldes (2015, 29–41).

  56. 56.

    After Husserl moved to Freiburg, and following the dismantling of the philosophical society of Göttingen, the Conrads’ place became the constant address for their communication (Feldes, 213, 205). Thus, for example, Hering asked about von Sybel, who had been sent to the front. The letters he sent to HCM are cited by Feldes (2013, 209).

  57. 57.

    See here a letter of Hering from 23 April 1915 (found by Avé-Lallemant in HCM’s estate, cited in: Feldes, 2015, 64). However, Feldes leaves open the question whether the Bergzabern Circle was the realization of this early vision of Hering’s (Feldes, 2015, 64).

  58. 58.

    It is hard to miss the deep, almost maternal concern that the circle’s members felt for Husserl, in particular Stein who expressed her sense of personal responsibility for working with Husserl as his assistant (Stein, 2001, 41; 2005, 39) and her fear that: “alone the master would not publish anything else” (Stein, 2001, 56; 2005, 65). This is confirmed also by Ingarden’s reference to Husserl’s difficulties in completing the new redaction of the sixth investigation in the second edition of Logical Investigations. Thus, in a note from 1961 to his only surviving letter to Husserl, from July 1918, he testified: “The matter was a frequent topic of my conversation with Edith Stein, the erstwhile assistant of Husserl” (Ingarden, 1976, 438 n. 4). For the historical background of this letter, see the editor’s note to the publication of the ltter in German (see: Ingarden, 1972, 357), and to the English translation (Ingarden, 1976, n. **).

  59. 59.

    The small library was sponsored by Winthrop Pickard Bell (1885–1965), Husserl’s student from Göttingen, who belonged to the circle there. Bell regularly read the writings of his phenomenologist colleagues (see Stein, 2001, 3, 56, 66, 69, 71, 73, 128; 2005, 65, 79, 89, 90 n. 4, 170), provided Stein with funding for her research activities (Stein, 2001, 139; 2005, 187), which probably financed the activity of the Bergzabern Circle (see: Feldes, 2013, 205; Stein, 2005, 190), and probably had influence in Anglo-American politics, which he employed for Germany after the First World War. Later, Bell held a professorship in Canada (See Stein’s references to this in: Stein, 2001, 122, 130, 142; 2005, 162, 173, 190). Husserl’s letters to Bell were published in: Husserl (1994b, 3–58).

  60. 60.

    For Stein, the Conrads’ house also possessed a spiritual value. In 1921, during a visit there, Stein reached the decision to convert to Christianity and was baptized, with HCM serving as her Godmother. Herbstrith describes Stein’s stay with Conrad-Martius before her baptism. See: Herbstrith (1972, 24–25).

  61. 61.

    Spiegelberg indicates that “[Der] Meister”, namely the master, was “the inner circle’s affectionate nickname for Husserl, or his associates” (Spiegelberg, 1985, 253).

  62. 62.

    See here HCM’s reference to the similarity between her ontological understanding of the dialectic between Being and nothingness and the idea of spirit (Geist) in the thinking of Peter Wust (1884–1940) in: HCM (1963e, 261 n. 6). Wust was influenced by Max Scheler and was very involved in the Munich-based Catholic monthly Hochland (1903–1941) in which many of HCM’s articles appeared.

  63. 63.

    See: Feldes (2015, 14 n. 25).

  64. 64.

    Avé-Lallemant characterized the crisis as a “religious crisis”. See Avé-Lallemant (2015, 70).

  65. 65.

    According to Avé-Lallemant, their stay at Bergzabern in this period entailed a break in publication and a turning to Christianity on the existential level, which was doubted in the scientific research the two had engaged in up to that point. See: Avé-Lallemant (2015, 78).

  66. 66.

    The community was established in Schobdach Franconia and HCM always spent the Christian holidays there (Avé-Lallemant, 2015, 48 n. 15).

  67. 67.

    This source is a reprint of: Stein, 1929.

  68. 68.

    According to Uwe Müller, it is almost certain that the treatise Finite and Eternal Being was composed between July 1935 and January 1937. See: Stein (2013, xiv).

  69. 69.

    For further reading on the conversion of Husserl’s early followers, see here: Schaber (2003).

  70. 70.

    Husserl and Ingarden rejected this link between faith and philosophy on the basis of identifying the religious dimension with Christian dogmatism (see: Feldes, 2015, 143). This position of theirs was expressed explicitly in reference to HCM’s work Metaphysische Gespräche (HCM, 1921b) (Stein sent Husserl and Ingarden copies, see: Stein, 2001, 147 n. 1; 2005, 198 n. 1). Stein naively commented that “Husserl sent a card expressing his delight”, though she certainly mentioned Husserl’s stinging remark when he received the book and wrote to her: “I will first have to see how much of it considers philosophy as a rigorous science” (Stein, 2001, 146; 2005, 197). In his letters to Ingarden (Husserl, 1968, 23) and to Bell, Husserl expressed himself more decisively against HCM’s approach, which he considered to lack scientific rigor and to be instead “romantic ingenious soulful” (Sinnig-seelenvolle Romantik) (Husserl, 1994b, 34). In this spirit, he correctly identified the influence of the Catholic philosopher of romance, Franz von Baader (1765–1841). See Husserl (1994b, 34 n. 104). For examples of HCM referring to Franz von Baader, see HCM (1921a, 62, 66, 127, 140). Feldes also notes Von Sybel’s reference to Franz von Baader (Feldes, 2015, 153). Dahlstrom argues that “the young Heidegger sees something that largely escapes Husserl’s intellectual radar, namely, that the phenomena constituting religious experience, phenomena at the core of the timelessness and historicity of human existence, do not readily admit, if at all, of a scientific comprehension” (Dahlstrom, 2001, 174). Scharff adds in this regard that “the ‘something’ that Heidegger sees and that Husserl neglects is not just religious experience; it is the ‘being’ of every lived through dimension of Dasein that cannot be done ontological justice by a ‘theoretical’ account. […] it is a wider sense of meaningfulness” (Scharff, 2019, xxv).

  71. 71.

    See here also: Oesterreicher (1953, 334 n. 1).

  72. 72.

    See here: Vidal (1972) (cited from: Baring, 2018, 115 n. 5).

  73. 73.

    Spiegelberg’s words appear as an excursus entitled “Note: Phenomenology and Conversion”. This section was omitted from the third expanded edition of his book (Spiegelberg, 1984), despite the fact that in contrast to its predecessors, this expanded edition devoted space to discussing the realistic phenomenologists. The issue of conversion is addressed in “Faith, Individuality, and Radicalism”, appearing as an appendix to this volume.

  74. 74.

    The phrase “to return to the things themselves” appeared in Husserl’s writings in several contexts. See also: Husserl (1970a, §4 172, §6 174–175/1984, §4 17–18, §6 22–23). This saying has also been discussed extensively in connection to the realistic orientation in phenomenology, see: Seifert (1971, 1995), Kuhn (1969), Schmücker (1956).

  75. 75.

    For further reading, see: Willey (1978).

  76. 76.

    This writing about phenomenology contradicts Spiegelberg’s statement regarding the first generation of phenomenology: “They could not but be ‘original’ in the sense of doing phenomenology without the threat of metaphenomenology” (Spiegelberg, 1985, 253).

  77. 77.

    HCM’s reflections about the issue appear particularly in two main treatises written in relation to the question: what is phenomenology? See: HCM (1951b, 2015b).

  78. 78.

    The German original says: “Um Phänomenologen zu sein oder zu werden, muβ einem ja irgenwie der Star gestochen sein” (in order to become a phenomenologist, one must somehow be a stabbed star) (HCM, 2015a, 57). These lines were omitted from the English translation of the speech (HCM, 2015b, 61). This passage is also cited in: U. Avé-Lallemant (1965/66, 208). However, the image of a “veil” falling appears in HCM’s critique of Idealism (see: HCM, 1963k, 44; HCM, 1963c, 195) and Positivism (see: HCM, 1920a, 1), within which they were accused of philosophical “blindness”.

  79. 79.

    For further reading, see: Hennigfeld (2015).

  80. 80.

    HCM declared the connection to Goethe explicitly as driving to return “the eye and the gazing power”. As she put it: “We see that alongside the wisdom that analyzes conceptually, the eye and the observing power return again to the order (Rechte), as was requested by Goethe” (HCM, 1963f, 347–348). An affinity between Goethe’s theory of colors and HCM’s view of the issue is noticeable in: HCM, 1929a). The association of Husserl’s phenomenology to Goethe has been indicated in the literature, see: Heinemann (1934), Seifert (20042005, 133–137), Spiegelberg (1984, 23 n. 9).

  81. 81.

    English translation cited from: Spiegelberg (1960, 197/1984, 193).

  82. 82.

    See here HCM’s distinction between three types of phenomenology: the idealistic-transcendental of Husserl; the existentialism of Heidegger; and the ontologism of the Munich-Göttingen phenomenologists. See: HCM (1965b/1959). The division into three types of phenomenology appears already in an unpublished manuscript from 1916 (HCM, 1916aN, 7–8). Avé-Lallemant testified that the manuscript was lost until 1960 (Avé-Lallemant, 1975a, 34). Also, in a handwritten note, Avé-Lallemant adds that probably Jean Hering produced the manuscript in a typewriter font during the First World War (Avé-Lallemant, 1975b, 197; see here also: Parker, 2020, 170). Avé-Lallemant emphasizes that already from the beginning, a difference was apparent between the phenomenology of the Munich Circle and that of Husserl, which he characterized thus: “For Husserl, the method of phenomenology was essentially an intentional analysis (Intentionalanalyse). For the Munichers [it was] essence analysis (Wesensanalyse)” (Avé-Lallemant, 1975a, 24). See here also: Avé-Lallemant (1971, 218).

  83. 83.

    Von Hildebrand, a student of Reinach, taught in Munich after the Second World War (Avé-Lallemant, 1975a, 23). He was recognized by Husserl as continuing to develop Reinach’s theory (Schuhmann, 1987, 243) and as developing on the basis of his teacher a theory of phenomenological realism (Dubois, 1995, 97 n. 83).

  84. 84.

    Arnold Metzger (1892–1974) returned to Germany having left to the USA during the Nazi period. He held a teaching position at Munich University, alongside HCM. The work cited is his main treatise, in which he dealt with the problem of relativism, which he believed phenomenology was unable to solve. For further reading on phenomenology and relativism, see: Carr (1985).

  85. 85.

    Ingarden mentions the opinion that characterized several of Husserl’s students and critics, whereby “there never was such a period in which Husserl was a realist with regard to the real world and that only certain of his Gottingen pupils interpreted Husserl’s opinions realistically” (Ingarden, 1975, 4 n. 4).

  86. 86.

    Notwithstanding, Avé-Lallemant and Schuhmann rightly noted here, the esteem in which the members of the Munich Circle held Husserl’s should not be seen as mere acceptance. A more critical approach on this point was voiced by Rosenward, who followed Landgrebe’s critique (Landgrebe, 1963, 21–22), arguing that their static understanding of the correlation between an object and intending it “turns out into faith, a faith which for many adherents of the Munich-Göttingen school was easily transformed into religious faith. This opened to phenomenology a path towards irrationalism” (Rosenward, 1989, 19).

  87. 87.

    The reference to Theodor Conrad’s estate is cited from: Smid (1982, 130, 150 n. 139).

  88. 88.

    Ludwig Landgrebe, Husserl’s close student in Freiburg, was one of the most severe critics of the Munich-Göttingen Circle’s. He argued that his colleagues’ use of the observation method was not only more intensive than that characteristic of Husserl, but also irresponsible. In his opinion, this gave phenomenology a bad name, and as a result, it was perceived as “method-less intuition”. See: Landgrebe (1963, 21).

  89. 89.

    Regarding the formative influence of “essence intuition” on the Munich Circle, see: Schmücker (1956, 1–33), Ebel (1965), Pfänder (1913), Hering (1921, 39–40), Pfeiffer (2005, 1–13), Reinach (1951).

  90. 90.

    See also: HCM (1923b, 159; 1965e, 377; 1965h, 347).

  91. 91.

    In this context, Reinach likens direct observation as a movement from Socrates to Plato: “Socrates did signification analysis […] Here it is a question of clearing up the obscurities and contradictions of significations a procedure which, moreover, really has nothing to do with definition, and certainly not with induction. By contrast, Plato does not start with words and significations. He aims at the direct view of the ideas, the unmediated grasp of essences as such” (Reinach, 1969, 210, my emphasis).

  92. 92.

    Here, “Being” indicates the all-encompassing phenomenon of primordial Being (Das Sein) or “the Being or beings”, while “being” stands for particular existing things (die Seiende). This choice follows the classic translation of Heidegger’s Being and Time. See translator’s note in: Heidegger (1962, 19 n. 1). While for Heidegger it seems that almost anything one can think or talk about might count as a “being” or entity (books, animals, numbers etc.), regarding “Being” he clarifies: “In the question which we are to work out, what is asked about is Being—that which determines entities as entities, that on the basis of which entities are already understood, however we may discuss them”, Heidegger (1962, 25–26).

  93. 93.

    In this context, see Rosenward’s assertion that on this point HCM opposed her realistic phenomenologist colleagues, who adopted the quantifying approach typical of the modern scientific method, which relied on what was then called the “‘subjectless’ aspect of reality” (Rosenward, 1989, 22–23). However, as I have demonstrated above, HCM’s argument that harmony between the personal logos and the world’s logos represents a more complex position of HCM, who assimilated her philosophy of the I into the philosophy of Being.

  94. 94.

    This insight enabled HCM to view Heidegger’s perception, in Being and Time, of human understanding as the key to the philosophy of being and the interpretation of reality as an expression of “performing a radical existential turn”. Although alongside this, we should also mention her criticism of his chain of thought, which she described as “an absolutization of the mode of existence of the I-being by means of which once again brought about relativization of any other being”. See HCM (1963h, 186).

  95. 95.

    One of the strictest critics of the early phenomenologists’ perception of essence was Ludwig Landgrebe, who characterized their use of Husserl’s phenomenology as “‘method-less intuitionism’ (methodenlosen Intuitionismus) that gives phenomenology a bad name” (Landgrebe, 1963, 21). No less severe was Rosenward’s critique, claiming that: “Göttingen circle shows the results of advancing the ‘seeing of essences’ in isolation from the other procedures of the phenomenological method, and demonstrates the contradictoriness and lack of clarity that characterize phenomenology as a whole” (Rosenward, 1989, 32).

  96. 96.

    The image of a “veil” falling fits well into the severe criticism HCM directed at Idealism (HCM, 1963c, 195; 1963k, 44) and Positivism (HCM, 1920a, 1), which accused them of philosophical “blindness”.

  97. 97.

    See also another reference by HCM to the need for a “spiritual eye” (HCM, 1965e, 377) and a “philosophical organ” (HCM, 1965g, 404). Rosenward characterizes HCM’s approach to nature following this insight as “ontologized sensuality”, see: Rosenward (1989, 28).

  98. 98.

    See here also: Reinach (1921c) or Reinach (1976).

  99. 99.

    On this point, HCM accepts Hering’s fundamental distinction. See: Hering (1921). HCM stated her agreement with Hering’s approach in this regard, see: HCM (1923b, 162). For further reading, see: De Santis (2015). The influence of Hering on HCM and Stein is discussed in: Ales Bello (1993), Surzyn (2002).

  100. 100.

    See here Seifert’s argument that Husserl’s separation between the ideal and the real in Logical Investigations led him to Idealism (Siefert, 1987, 142).

  101. 101.

    Rosenward argues that phenomenology played a specific role in what he calls “the process of ‘ontologization’ in the twentieth century western philosophy” (Rosenward, 1989, 11). A systematic expression of this trend is apparent in Reinach’s phenomenological a priori doctrine, which captures the range of his phenomenological realistic insights. It is also found in the background of his discussion of Kant. See in particular: Reinach (1951, 1921b/1968, 1969, 1921c/1976, 1921d/1983).

  102. 102.

    The precedence given to ontology over epistemology is at the center of HCM’s continuing dialogue with the leaders of this trend. See in particular her extensive discussions with: Heidegger: HCM (1930N, 1963b, 1963c, 1963h, 1963i, 1963j, 1965b, 1965c, 1965e, 1965g); on Nicolai Hartmann, see: HCM (1963b).

  103. 103.

    As will transpire later, according to HCM, after the transcendental turn, Husserl’s indifference toward epistemology turned to formulating “real epistemological philosophy” (HCM, 1965b, 395).

  104. 104.

    In this context, see also: HCM (1931dN, 1963d).

  105. 105.

    Following his criticism of the early phenomenologists (particularly Reinach, Geiger, and HCM) on the issue of their understanding of Husserl’s essence intuition method, Landgrebe asserts that the “turning to the object” they employed expressed “more or less a ‘static’ correlativism between the intention and the object”, and that “essence intuition liberated from theories regarding the real in all areas”. In his opinion, they surrendered the essential that was Husserl’s ontological starting point. Yet, Landgrebe argues that for Husserl this point did not serve a naïve realism that lead to the escape of subjectivity but to deepening its problematic. See: Landgrebe (1963, 21–22).

  106. 106.

    This stance has exceptions, for example Reinach and Pfänder. For Reinach see: Dubois (1995, 148–149); for Pfänder see: Spiegelberg (1982, 26–34).

  107. 107.

    HCM discusses the term “real reality” also in: HCM (1965b, 397).

  108. 108.

    See: Daubertiana A I 5, Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich, cited from: Schuhmann and Smith (1985, 792 n. 39). Schuhmann and Smith indicate that Daubert’s manuscript was “written in preparation for his discussion with Husserl on Jan. 18 1904” (Schuhmann & Smith, 1985, 792).

  109. 109.

    However, Kuhn was suspicious about the capability of what he designates as “duplication of the embarrassment” to solve the philosophical problem of reality (Kuhn, 1971, 5).

  110. 110.

    Theodor Celms was one of Husserl’s important students from Freiburg, whom he greatly appreicated. Celms characterized the epoché as a phenomenological reflection that leaves open the question of idealism-realism and the phenomenological reduction that is a methodological tool. In his opinion, due to the lack of distinction between epoché and reduction, Husserl reaches “metaphysical spiritualism”. See: Celms (1928, 309; 1993, 83–84). éCelms contends that from a philosophical point of view, the only epoché is justifiable as a procedure of suspension of judgment that implies no decision regarding the reality of the world (Celms, 1928, 427–436; 1993, 188–199). Celms’ thinking has attracted research attention over the years. His mentioned essay was reprinted as an independent book, together with some of his other writings (Celms, 1993), edited by Juris Rozenvalds, who also added an Introduction. See: Rozenvalds (1993, 13–30). Some of Celms’ estate writings have also been published. See: Celms, 2012. For further reading, see Vēgners (2020). See here also Avé-Lallemant’s discussion on this issue: Avé-Lallemant (1971, 230–231). Avé-Lallemant goes further, stating that HCM’s approach whereby “in the clarification of the essences not only should ‘the handed-down preconceptions’ of ‘all philosophical and scientific fields’ be disregarded, but also the factual reality of the objects under investigation and of the subject performing them” must be dismissed. Avé-Lallemant clarifies that HCM “carried out a ‘phenomenological reduction’ without using that label” (Avé-Lallemant, 1984, 214). Russell maintains that concerning the epoché, “Husserl and his critics […] failed to understand each other on this point”. Moreover, the “self-limitation [that has been imposed by the epoché…] even prevents Husserl from taking a side on the question of realism/idealism” (Russell, 2007, 89).

  111. 111.

    See here Schuhmann’s reference to Reinach’s description of pure consciousness as Husserl’s “favourite concept” (Lieblingsbegriff). Schuhmann establishes that this choice of Husserl’s played a decisive role in the segregation of the Munich-Göttingen phenomenologists from Husserl’s Ideas (Husserl, 1952/2012a), see: Schuhmann (1987, 253).

  112. 112.

    Stein emphatically phrases a similar position and even views the metaphysical stance as the ultimate expression of a true philosopher. As she says: “… certainly each philosopher is in his heart, fundamentally, a metaphysician, either explicitly or implicitly. […] Each great philosopher has his own…” (Stein, 2001, 146; 2005, 197). However, the shift from phenomenology to metaphysics is far from being obvious and can even conflict with some prevailing opinion about phenomenological philosophy. See here Dubois’ note: “Phenomenology is stereotyped as being independent of metaphysics, so much so that we find a philosopher like Karol Wojtyla (now Pope John Paul II), i.e., a metaphysical realist engaged in phenomenological analysis, in the Acting Person and elsewhere, despairing of arriving at metaphysical knowledge on the basis of phenomenology” (Dubois, 1995, 148).

  113. 113.

    The discussion of the issue of Husserl’s idealism-realism exceeds the scope of this Introduction. For the view of Husserl as a realist, see Ameriks (1977), Smith and McIntyre (1971). For the view of Husserl as an idealist, see: Ingarden (1975), Küng (1972a), Küng (1972b), Morriston (1976). The third interpretation of Husserl’s stance toward the related debate as “neutrality” is presented in: Holmes (1975).

  114. 114.

    See here also: Husserl (2012b, xil).

  115. 115.

    These words were said by Husserl in conversation with his student Helmuth Plessner. See Plessner (1959, 35).

  116. 116.

    These words by Husserl are cited in: (Biemel, 1952, xv).

  117. 117.

    See here Husserl’s approval of Fink’s interpretation of phenomenology in a preface he composed to Fink’s article dealing with criticism of his transcendental phenomenology (see here: Fink, 1938, 1966, 2000). Husserl wrote: “I am happy to be able to state that it contains no sentence which I could not completely accept as my own or openly acknowledge as my own conviction” (Husserl, 2000, 71).

  118. 118.

    Husserl’s reservations about the Conrads were well-known and discussed among the members of the Munich Circle. See here Stein’s comment in a letter to Ingarden dated 19 February 1918: “I do not know what I would do if Husserl takes offense at my letter and, like Conrad, I fall out of his favor” (Stein, 2001, 73; 2005, 89). Husserl’s reservations about HCM’s philosophy are more than implied in his letter to Fritz Kaufmann dated 4 January 1937, where Husserl asks him not to mention this issue to her, because: “she is having a hard enough time as it is” (Husserl, 1994b, 350).

  119. 119.

    Ingarden, too, recoiled from the metaphysical accentuation of HCM’s phenomenology. Stein came to defense her friend with the following words: “I do not know whether your fear for phenomenology is justified. Of course, that is not phenomenology without exception. […] It is not just ‘poetic fabrication’. You noted that yourself […] You feel that a claim for truth is hidden here […] You will not deny that, in part, it concerns itself with reasonable connections in a strictly phenomenological sense” (Stein, 2001, 146;  2005, 196). See in this context HCM’s discussion on the relation between phenomenology and speculation, in: HCM (1965e/1959b).

  120. 120.

    Husserl’s words are cited from: Spiegelberg (1959, 60). See also in this context: Schuhmann (1973, 1–16). Similar sentiments appeared in Husserl’s letter to Spiegelberg from 12 August 1930, in which he said: “it would be a pity if you, like some of the phenomenologists of the early period, remained stuck in ontologism and realism” (cited from: Schuhmann, 1973, 4). Spiegelberg regarded himself as “one of the few survivors of an older generation” (Spiegelberg, 1985, 251), but also as “a second-generation student of Husserl and Becker, but mostly of Pfänder, who supervised my Ph.D. thesis” (Spiegelberg, 1985, 253).

  121. 121.

    The citation is taken from Husserl letter to Bell from 28 January 1922.

  122. 122.

    Husserl’s words were addressed to Dorion Cairns in a later from 21 March 1930. Avé-Lallemant adds in this regard that for this reason, “he [Husserl] could not consider them as genuine phenomenologists and nor even as philosophers” (Avé-Lallemant, 1975a, 28). These words received additional confirmation from Spiegelberg’s report that was based on his personal conversations with Husserl. Spiegelberg maintained that for Husserl, the writings of the Munich phenomenologists did not constitute real phenomenology or even philosophy but could only be valid as individual scientific achievements. Furthermore, from his final meeting with Husserl on 8 October 1926, he understood that for Husserl the break with the Munich phenomenologists was irreparable. See: Spiegelberg (1959, 60–61). Elsewhere, Spiegelberg described Husserl’s conflict with the Munichers as a “hopeless schism” (Spiegelberg, 1982, 3). However, in Cartesian Meditations, Husserl saw fit to praise the early phenomenologists for developing a different ontology to that prevalent in the eighteenth century and for using terms that were far from the sensory-visual view or alternatively for leaving the concrete gaze to build a priori sciences. See: Husserl (1999, §59 138/1991, §59 165). In this context, see: Rosenward (1989, 13). Obviously, Husserl did not mean by these words retreating from his transcendental orientation, rather they indicated his growing awareness of the involvement of concrete dimensions in the transcendental subjective experience.

  123. 123.

    Husserl refers here to the work: HCM (1916). On the obstacles accompanying the publication of this essay, which was intended to appear in the second volume of the Yearbook in 1916, but which eventually appeared in the third volume the same year, see: Schuhmann (1990, 10).

  124. 124.

    See here also: HCM (1965b, 402; 1920b, 130 n. 1). Stein also testified that “both Conrads also always speak of Husserl with great admiration” (Stein, 2001, 144; 2005, 193). However, Stein was less naïve than HCM in this regard. Thus, in a letter to Ingarden from 15 October 1921 she wrote that despite “look[ing] up to him with unbounded admiration and thankfulness”, this takes place “in spite of everything” (Stein, 2001, 143; 2005, 193). Elsewhere, in a letter to Fritz Kaufmann from 22 November 1919, Stein clarifies: “[…] the Master […] it is not easy to maintain the right attitude […] for me he will always remain the Master, whose image cannot be blurred by any human weakness” (Stein, 1993, 37–38; 2010, 49–50). Again, in a letter to Kaufmann from 25 January 1920: “I will never stop having a boundless veneration for the philosopher Husserl and will always concede any human weakness as his fate” (Stein, 1993, 39; 2010, 52).

  125. 125.

    Notwithstanding, in the literature HCM frequently mentions as Husserl’s student. See: Walther (1960, 331), Avé-Lallemant and Schuhmann (1992, 79).

  126. 126.

    See here also Husserl’s letters to Roman Ingarden: Husserl (1968, 61 [21 Dec. 1930]; 1968, 73 [13 Nov. 1931]; 1968, 77 [11 June 1932]).

  127. 127.

    In another letter to Ingarden dated 9 October 1926, Stein describes as a “real tragedy” the fact that: “none of his students are in complete agreement with him… he obviously feels that, without really wanting to acknowledge it” (Stein, 2001, 144; 2005, 235). For further reading about Stein’s view of Husserl’s Phenomenology, see: Stein (2014, 147–150).

  128. 128.

    While he chose them to serve as sub-editors for the Yearbook (the most prominent among them Pfänder, Geiger, and Scheler), and their writings filled a significant proportion of its issues over the years, Husserl expressed unexplained reservations about the Munich phenomenologists. Against this background, Speigelberg characterizes as “conspicuous by absence” the fact that their writings were not included in the Festschrift for Husserl’s sixtieth birthday (Van Breda & Taminiaux, 1959), which was the only one dedicated to him duirng his lifetime (Spiegelberg, 1984, 240–241). However, it is worth noting the inclusion in the volume of HCM’s article, “Die transzendentale und die ontologische Phänomenologie” (HCM, 1959, 1965b). For further reading on the relationship between Husserl and the Munichers, see Sepp (2019, 9–16).

  129. 129.

    In this regard, Spiegelberg mentioned Hussserl’s disappointment that only a few of his students at the University of Göttingen “were ready and eager to accept his ideas when he began to present his transcendental phenomenology”. However, importantly, he adds that “even those students were and reamined anything but orthodox followers” (Speigelberg, 1984, 111). Elsewhere, in his notes from an interview with Heldebrand at Fordham University in 1954, Spiegelberg cites Husserl’s following words from 1935: “I divide up my students into white sheep and black sheep; you belong to the black sheep” (Herbert Speigelberg Papers, WUA00070/Box 2, Folder 9/070-NBK1953), cited from: Parker (2021, 2 n. 3).

  130. 130.

    Husserl’s words are cited from a letter he wrote to H. Stolenberg in 1934 (see: Thyssen, 1959, 179) after Stolenberg sent him a manuscript for submission to the Yearbook. Probably, Stolenberg did not know that the Yearbook ceased being published at the end of 1933, though this was never officially declared. Schuhmann emphasizes that it was not the external political circumstances of National Socialism that led to this, but Husserl’s conviction “that he should not go on undermining the future chances of his own phenomenology by publishing under his own name and editorship all these pseudo-phenomenologies which were a lethal threat to it” (Schuhmann, 1990, 23). Schuhmann refers to the great importance that Husserl ascribed to his stance as the editor and his overall identification with the Yearbook. See: Schuhmann (1990, 10).

  131. 131.

    In this context, see Stein’s description of HCM as “someone, who at no time writes from other than an irresistible inner force…” (Stein, 2001, 146; 2005, 196).

  132. 132.

    See here also: Avé-Lallemant (1977, 301–302; 2015, 70); for the Jewish background of HCM’s family, see: Hueglin (2010, 110–117).

  133. 133.

    Alios Dempf (1891–1982) was a Catholic philosopher. Due to his resistance to National Socialism, he was banned from teaching in 1938. In 1958, he honored HCM with a preface to the Festschrift that was dedicated to her 70th birthday. See: Dempf (1958).

  134. 134.

    See here HCM’s letter to Stein from 13 November 1932 (Stein, 1993, 125; 2010, 254) and to Marvin Farber (HCM, 1952N).

  135. 135.

    In a letter from 9 January 1923, Husserl wrote to HCM about a possible grant in Berlin, suggesting that she compose an application from the materials she was dealing with (philosophy of nature). On 1 October 1930, HCM submitted a grant application to the Sarah Smith Research Fellowship of Newnham College (Cambridge) on behalf of which Husserl wrote a recommendation letter. In a letter from 28 November 1932, Husserl wrote to HCM that he was sorry she had not received the grant (Husserl, 1994a, 19–20). The archive contains several applications HCM submitted to various institutions, both at early and rather late stage of her career, the late 1940s and early 1950s. See: HCM (1931bN, 1932N, 1937aN, 1949cN). The letters Marvin Farber wrote her (25 January 1952; 7 February 1952) indicate that HCM also applied to the Rockefeller Foundation and the topic of her proposal was: The Ideological Roots of National Socialism. See: Farber (1952N).

  136. 136.

    Two of HCM’s brothers (Leonhard Martius and Friedrich Franz) also fell in the Second World War, see: Martius (2002, 14), Hueglin (2010, 115).

  137. 137.

    Like HCM, also Stein referred in her letters to damage of war to phenomenology. For example, a letter to Ingarden from 27 April 1917 Stein wrote: “Nothing is going on with phenomenology during the war. […] Summer has to come sometimes since surely the laws of nature have not changed and it seems to want to come. I wonder whether peace will come then, too?” (Stein, 2001, 56–57; 2005, 65–66).

  138. 138.

    For further reading, see: Plümacher (1996, 15–95).

  139. 139.

    These meetings were organized by Franz Georg Schmücker who wrote his dissertation on their basis (Schmücker, 1956). See: Avé-Lallemant and Schuhmann (1992, 79). Interestingly, late in his life, Husserl also began to view the idea of group philosophizing as more dominant in the perception of philosophy and the sciences. In Crisis, his fundamental argument is that the continuity of philosophical problems and the discourse of philosophers with the history of philosophy enables a “community of philosophers” (Philosophengemeinschaft) and a “common unit of thinkers” (Denkergemeinschaft) that establish what he calls the “generativity” (Generativität) of philosophy (Husserl, 1976, 443–444) and the “communalization” (Vergemeinschaftung) that occur in philosophy, the sciences, and in general experience. Husserl explains: “[…] in living with one another each one can take part in the life of the others. Thus, in general the world exists not only for isolated men but for the community of men; and this is due to the fact that even what is straightforwardly perceptual is communalized” (Husserl, 1970b, §47 163/1976, §47 166). See also: Husserl (1970b, §34, §52/1976, §34, §52).

  140. 140.

    See here: HCM (1940aN, 1940bN [two drafts of this work], 1948, 1949a, 1949b, 1951a, 1954, 1955b, 1957, 1958a, 1960a, 1960b, 1965f).

  141. 141.

    See her two manuscripts with an identical title: 2 Abschnitt: Natur (§32–§48); 2 Abschnitt: Natur (in: HCM, 19151919N). In this context, see an enthusiastic recommendation letter from Husserl, dated 10 January 1915, to the editor of the journal Logos, Paul Siebeck, to consider publishing a planned work of hers about philosophy of nature, in which he expressed his appreciation of her talents (Husserl, 1994d, 269). The early date of this letter indicates that HCM’s interest in the issue of nature was already familiar to her colleagues early in her career, many years before any of her publications on this issue appeared. Also, in a letter dated 16 March 1921, Husserl writes to HCM that he is sorry that her manuscript on the philosophy of nature is not ready, and that he would be happy to print it as the first or second chapter of his Yearbook. See Husserl (1994a, 18).

  142. 142.

    See here: “The phenomenon of reality and Reality”, in: Spiegelberg (1975, 130–172).

  143. 143.

    A letter from HCM to Martin Heidegger dated 27 October 1947 indicates that there was a possibility that she would receive a “teaching position” (Lehrauftrag), which was in fact an honorary professorship, not only in Munich but also in Erlangen. She wrote that Munich had a “momentary inflation of philosophers” and asked about the situation at the time in Freiburg, where he was then serving as a professor. See: HCM (1947N).

  144. 144.

    During the years 2003–2004, I spent time alternately at the universities of Munich and Frankfurt for my post-doctoral research for the Minerva Fund. During this period, lasting a few weeks each time, I worked with Avé-Lallemant for many long hours every day. He shared with me much of his knowledge about HCM and her life story and gave me access to many original materials. I am greatly in his debt for much of my knowledge about her character and thought.

  145. 145.

    Avé-Lallemant’s dissertation was devoted to HCM’s work and was written under her supervision. See Avé-Lallemant (1959a).

  146. 146.

    In 1958, HCM received financing for an assistant from The German Research Association (DFG) and appointed Avé-Lallemant to this position. See: Pfeiffer (2005, 26).

  147. 147.

    The publication ban imposed upon HCM left her no choice but to publish her ideas in articles and lectures. Many of these were gathered in this trilogy. In this context, see: Avé-Lallemant (1984, 261 n. 5).

  148. 148.

    Avé-Lallemant’s curating work on the literary estates of the prominent members of the Munich-Göttingen Circle was collected in: Avé-Lallemant (1975b). The volume is divided into the following chapters: Alexander Pfänder (Avé-Lallemant, 1975b, 1–40), Max Scheler (Avé-Lallemant, 1975b, 41–124), Johannes Daubert (Avé-Lallemant, 1975b, 125–138), Moritz Geiger (Avé-Lallemant, 1975b, 139–159), Theodor Conrad (Avé-Lallemant, 1975b, 159–170), Adolf Reinach (Avé-Lallemant, 1975b, 171–180), Maximilian Beck (Avé-Lallemant, 1975b, 181–190), Hedwig Conrad-Martius (Avé-Lallemant, 1975b, 191–256).

  149. 149.

    The treatise Realontologie has two versions (see: HCM, 19151919N; HCM, 19191922N). The published version is taken from the second, mature version (HCM, 1923b) that did not appear in its entirety. The treatise that appeared in Husserl’s Jahrbuch is composed of three parts: 1. Realität (HCM, 1923b, 159–190), 2. Materialität (HCM, 1923b, 191–245), 3. Konkrete Stoffgestaltung (HCM, 1923b, 246–333). The third part is composed of five paragraphs: a. Materialer Konstitution (HCM, 1923b, 246–282), b. Ton und Geräusch (HCM, 1923b, 282–295), c. Temperature (HCM, 1923b, 295–303), d. Licht (HCM, 1923b, 303–333). Paragraph d. has a second section called “Farben—Ein Kapitel aus Realontologie” (HCM, 1929a). This section appeared as a contribution to special issue of Husserl’s Yearbook that was devoted to Husserl’s 70th birthday (HCM, 1929a). This chapter is divided into sections. Sections §251–§289 are a direct continuation of the published book that ends at §250. Paragraph d. has another section, “Geruch und Geschmack” (HCM, 1929bN) sections §289–§309 (supposed to be §290–§309, probably a mistake by HCM). Yet, the last section was not completely elaborated in the second version (zweite Fassung) (HCM, 19191922N) and in the archive there is a manuscript that in the first version (Erste Fassung) (HCM, 19191922N) was part of the section “Geruch und Geschmack” and has the same title (HCM, 1929bN, §185–§206, §299–§257). Part of this section overlaps parts in “Farben—Ein Kapitel aus Realontologie” (HCM, 1929a). Finally, in the file of Realontologie in the archive there exists another manuscript whose title is “Historisch-metaphysische Anmerkung” (3 pages, no archive registration) that was supposed to close part one (Realität), but due to some unclear reason was not printed together with it. As stated before, in the first version (erste Fassung) of Realontologie (1915–1919) HCM intended to publish the sections that dealt with the issue of nature, two manuscripts included in the second version (zweite Fassung) of Realontologie, with an identical title: 2 Abschnitt: Natur; 2 Abschnitt: Natur, 32–48 (HCM, 19191922N) 19151919N. However, the discussion of nature was left outside the published version of Realontologie that is largely based on the second version of the treatise², probably due to the plan that it would serve as a basis for a second book of Realontologie. Again, this plan, just like so many others of her plans, never took place.

  150. 150.

    This work has two drafts: HCM (1940aN, 1940bN).

  151. 151.

    The relationship between Avé-Lallemant and HCM has been discussed in different contexts in Feldes’ book. See: Feldes (2015). See also Herald Seubert’s words following Avé-Lallemant’s death in 2015: https://iap.li/downloads/Nachruf-EAL.pdf.

  152. 152.

    Spiegelberg was himself one of the thinkers who developed the realistic approach in phenomenology (see: Avé-Lallemant, 1971, 2), and even Husserl treated him as such, see: Spiegelberg (1959, 61). In the first two editions of his historical book, a tiny amount of space was devoted to the phenomenologists of the Munich and Göttingen Circles. In this context, HCM was mentioned alongside eight other phenomenologists, under the category “Other Members of the Göttingen and Munich Circles”, who were mentioned with a few biographical details and their main themes and select bibliographies. See: Spiegelberg (1960, 220–221; 1965, 218–227). But in the third, expanded edition of The Phenomenological Movement (Spiegelberg, 1984), the phenomenologists of the Munich and Göttingen Circles were reclassified from “the older phenomenological movement” (Spiegelberg, 1960, 168) to “the original phenomenological movement” (Spiegelberg, 1984, 166). Also, separate chapters were devoted to the work of Hedwig Conrad-Martius (Avé-Lallemant, 1984) and Roman Ingarden (Küng, 1984). Spiegelberg explained the changes he introduced in the third edition while focusing on the figures of HCM and Ingarden saying that “[the] two have risen later to independent importance” (Spiegelberg, 1984, 170).

  153. 153.

    An exception to this rule is a single article translated into English: HCM (1959b). The German source is: HCM (1965e).

  154. 154.

    Smid suggested two explanations to the question of how come the huge scope of the writings of the outstanding thinkers of the Munich circle did not attract the attentions of scholars. The first, voiced by Paul Stern, Lipps’ student, maintains that one cannot undertake the phenomenological method of “pure description” since all concepts are already shaped beforehand by ones use of the language. The second concerns the neglection, already at the early stage, of the universal foundations of phenomenology (Smid, 1982, 140–142).

  155. 155.

    Some grounds for this theory can be found in the fact that in the third and enlarged edition of Spiegelberg’s book (Spiegelberg, 1984), where he expanded the discussion of the works of HCM and Ingarden, his reference to Stein, who had yet to be declared a saint, remained minor (Spiegelberg, 1960, 223–224/1984, 238–239). Thus, in a new paragraph he includes Stein among “other members… [who] can be introduced only as background in a condensed section” (Spiegelberg, 1984, 170). Since 1998, there have been regular academic conferences about Edith Stein. The growing interest in Stein’s thinking is apparent in the many studies that were written since her canonization, see: Calcagno (2007, 2016, 2018), Sawicki (1997), Borden Sharkey (2008), Borden Sharkey (2010), Feist and Sweet (2003), Schulz (2008), Vendrell-Ferran (2008, 2016), Lebech (2011), Ales Bello, Alfieri, and Shahid (2010a, 2010b).

  156. 156.

    Fritz Heinemann, a phenomenologist contemporary with HCM, properly classified this crisis as “a quiet process of disrupting the entering into the appearances (In-Erscheinung-Tretens)” (Heinemann, 1960, 184). Consequently, instead of what appears to testify to its reality and to the unity that connects the thing and its appearance to each other, destruction occurs in the world of phenomena. Eventually, appearance does not indicate reality, while reality cannot reveal its face through its appearances (Heinemann, 1960, 183–185). In this context, see further: Alles Bello (2004, 2008a, 2008d), Pfeiffer (2005), Moran and Szanto (2016).

  157. 157.

    See here also Husserl’s question what would be helpful in “preparing the way for phenomenology” (Husserl, 1952, §65 139/2012a, §65 129) in order to position us “on the threshold of phenomenology” or a the “beginning of phenomenology” (Husserl, 2012a, §84 174)/1952, §84 191).

  158. 158.

    The expression “Gateway to reality” is discussed in the article from 2014 (Chap. 4). At this point “Gateway to” seems to me as a better option than “Gate of”, as it preserves the metaphorical sense of the word “gate” yet remains faithful to the original.

  159. 159.

    See also: Avé-Lallemant (1971, 319–320).

  160. 160.

    Avé-Lallemant too stresses the particular important of her early work “for understanding the overall oeuvre of Hedwig Conrad-Martius”. See: Avé-Lallemant (1977, 301).

  161. 161.

    References to whole works appear with the title or abbreviation in italics.

  162. 162.

    Schuhmann refers to Reinach’s assistance in publishing HCM’s work in the third volume of the Yearbook (HCM, 1916). See Schuhmann (1990, 10).

  163. 163.

    In this context, the criticism of Brecht, who accused the Munich philosophers of “philosophical wretchedness” due to their lack of handling the issue of transcendentalism, is typical. See: Brecht (1948, 42 n. 2). See here also: Schmücker (1956, 39).

  164. 164.

    See here my reference to this view by Jaspers in: Miron (2012, 273).

  165. 165.

    The word in ancient Greek means relating to, or consisting of void or nothingness, yet it potentially can be transformed into a material thing (unlike absolute blank nothingness).

  166. 166.

    Likewise, HCM related to “birth from common spirit” that binds the phenomenologists together (HCM, 1960b, 62).

References

  • HCM’s writings are listed according to the publication year, with the date of composition added in brackets. Works by the same author are listed in order of publication, from earliest to latest and alphabetically. Archive materials that have yet to be published are noted with the letter N (Nachlass) after the year of their composition.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ales Bello, A. (1993). Edith Stein und Hedwig Conrad-Martius: eine menschliche und intellektuelle Begegnung, Phänomenologische Forschungen, 27(27), 256–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ales Bello, A. (2002). Hedwig Conrad-Martius and the Phenomenology of Nature. Analecta Husserliana (ANHU) (Vol. LXXX, pp. 210–232).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ales Bello, A. (2004). The Controversy about the Existence of the World in Edmund Husserl’s Phenomenological School. In A. Reinach, R. Ingarden, H. Conrad-Martius, & E. Stein (Eds.), Analecta Husserliana (ANHU) (Vol. LXXIX, pp. 97–115).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ales Bello, A. (Ed.). (2008a). Axiomathes, 18(4), 395–542 (special issue on Conrad-Martius).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ales Bello, A. (2008d). The human being in the context of nature: Philosophical anthropology and natural sciences in Hedwig Conrad-Martius. Axiomathes, (18), 425–443.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ales Bello, A., Alfieri, F., & Shahid, M. (Eds.). (2010a). Edith Stein. Hedwig Conrad-Martius Fenomenologia Metafisica Scienze (Phenomenology, Metaphysics, Science). Bari: Giuseppe Laterza di Giuseppe Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ales Bello, A., Alfieri, F., & Shahid, M. (Eds.). (2010b). Edith Stein, Hedwig Conrad-Martius, Gerda Walther, Fenomenologia della Persona, della vita e della Comunitá (Phenomenology of Person, of Life and of Community). Bari: Giuseppe Laterza di Giuseppe Laterza.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ameriks, K. (1977). Husserl’s Realism. The Philosophical Review, 86(4), 498–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (1958). Psychologisch-ontologische Perspektiven. Philosophisches Jahrbuch der Görres-Gesellschaft, Festschrift für Hedwig Conrad-Martius 66, 166–176. Freiburg-München: Karl Alber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (1959a). Der kategoriale Ort des Seelischen in der Naturwirklichkeit. Eine Untersuchung auf der Grundlage der realontologischen Arbeiten von Hedwig Conrad-Martius (Dissertation). München.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (1959b). Über Hedwig Conrad-Martius, zu ihrem 70 Geburtstage am 27. Februar 1958. In Spektrum des Geistes. Ein Quershnitt durch das Geistesschaffen der Gegenwart, Literaturkalender. 8. Jahrgang 1959, Voss, Hartfrid (Hrsg.). München: Hartfrif Voss Verlag, Ebenhausen, 24–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (1971). Phänomenology und Realität, Vergleichende Untersuchungen zur ‘München-Göttinger’ und ‘Freiburger’ Phänomenology (Habilitationsschrift). München.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (1975a). Die Antithese Freiburg- München in der Geschichte der Phänomenologie. In H. Kuhn, E. Avé-Lallemant, & R. Gladiator (Phaenomenologica 65) (Eds.), Die Münchener Phänomenologie, Vorträge des Internationalen Kongresses in München 13.–18. April 1971 (pp. 19–38). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (1975b). Die Nachlässe der Münchener Phänomenologen in der Bayrischen Staatsbibliothek, Catalogus Codicum manu scriptorium Bibliothecae Monacensis, Tomus (vol) X, part (pars) I. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (1977). Hedwig Conrad-Martius (1888–1966): Bibliographie. Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, 31(2), 301–315.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (1980). Religion und Metaphysik im Weltalter des Ausgleich. Tijdschrift voor Filosofie, 42(2), 266–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (1984). Hedwig Conrad-Martius (1888–1966), Phenomenology and Reality. In H. Spiegelberg, 1984. The Phenomenological Movement: A Historical Introduction, third revised and enlarged edition with the collaboration of Karl Schuhmann trans. Herbert Spiegelberg (Phaenomenologica 5/6). The Hague, Boston, Lancaster: Martinus Nijhoff, Kluwer Academic Publishing, 212–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (1988). Die Phänomenologische Bewegung. Ursprung, Anfänge und Ausblick. In H. Reiner Sepp (Ed.), Edmund Husserl und die phänomenologische Bewegung, Zeugnisse in Text und Bild (pp. 61–75). Freiburg/München.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (1994). Die Neubegründung einer Philosophischen Kosmologie im Werk von Hedwig Conrad-Martius. In F. Bernhard (Ed.), Cosmologica et Geographica. Festschrift für Heribert M. Nobis (Algorismus 13) (pp. 37–60). München.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E. (2015). Edith Stein und Hedwig Conrad-Martius—Begegnung in Leben und Werk. In B. Beckmann & H. Barbara Gerl-Falkovitz (Eds.), Edith Stein, Themen-Bezüge-Dokumente (2nd ed.) (pp. 66–88). Dresden: Verlag Text and Dialog.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, E., & Schuhmann, K. (1992). Ein Zeitzeuge über die Anfänge der phänomenologische Bewegung: Theodor Conrad Bericht aus dem Jahre 1954. Husserl Studies, 9, 77–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Avé-Lallemant, U. (1965/1966). Hedwig Conrad Martius. Jahrbuch der Evangelischen Akademie Tutzing, XV, 203–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baring, E. (2018). Neo-Scholasticism, Phenomenology, and the Problem of Conversion. In R. Heynickx & S. Symons (Eds.), So What’s New about Scholasticism? How Neo-Thomism Helped Shape the Twentieth Century. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baring, E. (2019). Converts to the Real: Catholicism and the Making of Continental Philosophy. Cambridge, MA, London, England: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Behler, W. (1956). Realität und Ek-Sistenz, Auseinandersetzung mit der Konzeption Martin Heidegger in Konfrontation mit der ontologischen Schriften von Hedwig Conrad-Martius (Diss.). München.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biemel, M. (1952). Einleitung des Heraugegebers. Ideen zu einer Reinen Phänomenologie und Phänomenologische Philosophie, Zweites Buch: Phänomenologische Untersuchungen zur Konstitution, Husserliana (Vol. IV, pp. xiii–xx). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borden Sharkey, S. (2008). Edith Stein and Thomas Aquinas on Being and Essence. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly, 82(1), 87–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borden Sharkey, S. (2010). Thine Own Self: Individuality in Edith Stein’s Later Writings. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brecht, F. J. (1948). Bewusstsein und Existenz, Wesen und Weg der Phänomenologie. Bremen: J. Storm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calcagno, A. (2007). The Philosophy of Edith Stein. Pittsburg: Duquesne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calcagno, A. (Ed.). (2016). Edith Stein: Women, Social-Political Philosophy, Theology, Metaphysics and Public History, New Approaches and Applications. Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht, and London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calcagno, A. (2018). On the Vulnerability of a Community: Edith Stein and Gerda Walther. Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology, 49(3), 255–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, D. (1985). Phenomenology and Relativism. In W. S. Hamrick (Ed.), Phenomenology in Practice and Theory (Phaenomenologica 92) (pp. 19–34). Dordrecht, London, and Lancaster: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Celms, T. (1928). Der phänomenologische Idealismus Husserls. Latvijas Universitatis Raksti, XIX, 251–436. (Reprinted in: Celms, 1993).

    Google Scholar 

  • Celms, T. (1993). Der Phaemenologische Idealismus Husserls Und Andere Schriften 1928–1943 (J. Rozenvalds, Ed.). Berlin, New York: Peter Lang. (Reprint of: Celms, 1928).

    Google Scholar 

  • Celms, T. (2012). Phänomen und Wirklichkeit des Ich, Studien über das subjektive Sein. Riga: FSI, Instut für Philosophie und Soziologie Universität Lettlands.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, T. (1953–1954N). Überblick über die Untersuchungen zur phänomenologischen Methode im WS [Winter Semester] 1953/54 und SS 1954. In Conradiana A.V.2, 13 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, T. (1954N). Bericht über die Anfänge der phänomenologischen Bewegung. In Conradiana A.V.1, 6 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, T. (1965–1969aN) [Späte Manuskripte]. Was ist und was will die Phänomenologie heute? In Conradiana A.VI.5, 16 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, T. (1965–1969bN) [Späte Manuskripte]. Zum Gedanken an Husserl und seine phänomenologische Methode. In Conradiana A.VI.6, 5 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1912N). [Aus der Studienzeit, Zeitungsbericht], Conrad-Martiusiana, D.I 2 [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1912–1938N). [Aus der München-Bergzabener Zeit], Conrad-Martiusiana, D.I 3 [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1913N). Die erkenntnisstheoretischen Grundlagen des Positivismus. Zur Ontologie und Erscheinungslehre der realen Auβenwelt, Conrad-Martiusiana, A.I 2 [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1915–1919N). Natur [part of: Realontologie] II. Buch. (zweite Fassung) Conrad-Martiusiana, A.I 4 3 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1916). Zur Ontologie und Erscheinungslehre der realen Auβenwelt: Verbunden mit einer Kritik positivistischer Theorien. Jahrbuch für Phänomenology and philosophische Forschung III. Halle: Max Niemeyer, 345–542.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1916aN). Über Ontologie, Conrad-Martiusiana, A.I 3, 14 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1917). Von der Seele. Summa II, Hellerau, 106–132 (appeared also as a chapter in: HCM 1921a, 26–86).

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1919–1922N). Realontologie II, Buch. (zweite Fassung). Conrad-Martiusiana, A.I.5, (§32–§48) 21 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1920a) [1912]. Die Erkenntnistheoretischen Grundlagen des Positivismus. Bergzabern: Heinrich Müller (private print).

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1920b). Nachwort. In Die erkenntnisstheoretischen Grundlagen des Positivismus (pp. 130–131). Bergzabern, Heinrich Müller (private print).

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1921a). Einleitung. In A. Reinach (Ed.), Gesammelte Schriften (pp. V–XXXVII). Halle: Max Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1921b). Metaphysische Gespräche, Halle (Saale): Max Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1923). Realontologie, Buch I. Jahrbuch für Philosophie und phänomenologische Forschung VI, 159–333. Halle: Max Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1924N). (Aus der München-Bergzabener Zeit, 1912–1938 [letter to Eugen Claassen, 25 Feb. 1924]), Conrad-Martiusiana, D.I 3 [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1929a). Farben. Ein Kapitel aus der Realontologie. Jahrbuch für Philosophie und phänomenologische Forschung, Festschrift für Edmund Husserl zum 70. Geburtstag gewidmet, Special Issue X (Suppl.), 339–370. Halle: Max Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1929bN). Geruch und Geschmack [§185–§206 299–257]. Conrad-Martiusiana, A.I 6, 25 p. + 3 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1930N). Heideggers ‘Sein und Zeit’, Metaphysische Quellpunkte, Conrad-Martiusiana, A.III 6, 42 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1930–1931N). Entwurf zu einer “universalen Schematik realen Sein” A.II 2, 10 p. [Nachlass]. Conrad-Martiusiana, A.III 6, 42 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1930–1932aN). Das “Ich”, Conrad-Martiusiana, A.II 1, 4 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1930–1932bN). Geisige Substanzen, Conrad-Martiusiana, A.II 1, 3 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1930–1932cN). Qualität, Conrad-Martiusiana, A.II 1, 3 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1931aN). Entwurf zu einer universalen Schematik realen Seins, Conrad-Martiusiana, A.II 2, 10 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1931bN). [Forschungantrag, Die Notgemeinschaft deutscher Wissenschaft: Erarbeitung einer universallen Ontologie; Recommendation letters from: E. Husserl, A. Pfänder and G. Misch, M. Geiger] Conrad-Martiusiana, D.IV1, [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1931cN). [Projekt einer Habilitation in Tübingen, Fragment eines Anragsentwerfes], Conrad-Martiusiana, D.IV2, 5 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1931dN). Skizze über den Sensualizmus, Phänomenalismus, Idealismus, Subjektivismus, Rationalizmus, Pantheismus einerseits und einer teleologischen, Kategorialen, realistischen, kosmischen Weltauffassung un dem Theismus enderseits, Conrad-Martiusiana, A.III 4, 3 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1932N). [Research Fellowship in Cambridge, UK: Ontologie in ihrem Verhältniss zum Idealismus und Realismus (Ontology and its relation to Idealism and Realism)], Conrad-Martiusiana, D.IV3, [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1933). Hat die Pflanze eine empfindende Seele? Natur und Kultur XXX/10 und 11, München-Solln Oktober und November 1933, 370–373, 403–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1934). Die Seele der Pflanze, Bioliogisch-ontologische Betractungen. Breslau: Frankes, Otto Borgmeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1937aN). [Bewerbung um Research Fellowship in London: Der wesenhafte Aufbau des Menschen (The Essential Construction of Man); Recommendation from H. André, Conrad-Martiusiana, D.IV4, [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1937bN). [Bewerbung Rockefekker-Foundationund Habilitation in Wien, Entwurf eines Exposés über Grundstukturen des Naturkosmos], Conrad-Martiusiana, D.IV 5, 4 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1938). Individualität und Fortpflanzung (A. Miiller, Individualitat und Fort pflanzung als Polaritatserscheinungen, 1938, und H. Andre, Die Polari tit und Pflanze als Schliissel zur Losung des Generationswechsel problems, 1938). Hochland XXXVI (5), February 1939, 422–426.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1939). Tierische Pilzzuchten (P. Buchner, Symbiose der Tiere mit pflanz lichen Organismen, 1939). Frankfurter Zeitung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1940aN). Die Metaphysik des Irdischen, Conrad-Martiusiana, A.VII 4, 195 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1940bN). Die Metaphysik des Irdischen, Conrad-Martiusiana, A.VII 5, 129 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1941 [1939]). Geschlechtsbestimmung (M. Hartmann, Geschlecht und Geschlechts bestimmung im Tier- und Pflanzenreich, 1939). Frankfurter Zeitung, 27. Oktober 1941.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1947N). [correspondence: Letter to Martin Heidegger] Conrad-Martiusiana, C.II, 4 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1948). Naturwissenschaftlich-metaphysische Perspektiven. Hamburg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1949a). Abstammungslehre. München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1949b). Bios und Psyche. Hamburg: Claassen and Goverts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1949cN). [Forschungsantrag: Die Notgemeinschaft deutscher Wissenschaft: Ausarbeitung einer umfassenden Antropologie (Elaboration of comprehensive Antropologie), D.IV.6 [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1951a). Das Lebendige—Die Endlichkeit der Welt—Der Mensch. Drei Dispute mit Curt Emmrich. Hochland-Bücherie. München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1951b). Vorwort. In R. Adolf (Ed.), Was ist Phänomenologie? Mit einem Vorwort von Hedwig Conrad-Martius (pp. 5–17). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1952N). [correspondence: Letter to Marvin Farber], Conrad-Martiusiana, C.II 2 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1954). Die Zeit. München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1955aN). [correspondence: Letter to Jean Hering, 13.1.1955], Conrad-Martiusiana, C.I 3 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1955b). Utopien der Menschenzuchtung. München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1957). Das Sein. München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1958a). Der Raum. München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1958bN). Von der Phänomenologie zur Metaphysik, Ansprache bei der Feier des 70. Geburtstages in der Universität München (Speech on 1 March 1958), Conrad-Martiusiana, D.II 2, 5 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich. (Published in: HCM 2015a; English translation: HCM 2015b).

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1959). Phenomenology and Speculation. Philosophy Today, III (1–4), 43–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1960a). Die Geistseele des Menschen. München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1960b). Edith Stein. In Edith Stein. 1960b. Briefe an Hedwig Conrad-Martius. München: Kösel, 59–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1961 [1944]). Der Selbstaufbau der Natur. Hamburg 1944; 2nd elaborated version. München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1963a). Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. I). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1963b [1932]). Bemerkung über Metaphysik und ihre methodische Stelle. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. I, pp. 49–88). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1963c [1932]). Dasein, Substantialität, Seele. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. I, pp. 194–227). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1963d [1932]). Die aktuelle Krisis des idealistischen Denkens. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. I, pp. 32–37). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1963e [1932]). Die fundamental Bedeutung eines substentiallen Seinsbegriffs für eine theistische Metaphysik. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. I, pp. 257–267). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1963f [1934]). Die “Seele” der Pflanze. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. I, pp. 276–362). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1963g [1934]). Existentialle Tiefe und Untiefe von Dasein und Ich. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. I, pp. 228–244). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1963h [1932]). Heideggers ‘Sein und Zeit’. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. I, pp. 185–193). München: Kӧsel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1963i [1931]). Sein und Nichts. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. I, pp. 89–100). München, Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1963j [1931]). Seinsphilosophie. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. I, pp. 15–31). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1963k [1930]). Was ist Metaphysik? In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. I, pp. 38–48). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1964). In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. II). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1965a). Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. III). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1965b [1958]). Die transzendentale und die ontologische Phänomenologie. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. III, pp. 393–402). München: Kösel. (Printed also in: HCM 1959).

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1965c [1961]). Die Wahrheit der Dinge. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. III, pp. 421–444). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1965d [1947]). Jenseits des Todes. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. III, pp. 184–195). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1965e [1956]). Phänomenologie und Spekulation. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. III, pp. 370–384). München: Kösel (English translation: HCM 1959b).

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1965f [1948]). Seele und Leib. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. III, pp. 107–124). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1965g [1960]). Sinn und Sein. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. III, pp. 403–420). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1965h [1956]). Über das Wesen des Wesens. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. III, pp. 335–356). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1965i [1956]). Wirkender und Empfangender Geist. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. III, pp. 295–314). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1965j [1954]). Wissenschaft, Mythos und Neu Testament. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. III, pp. 207–222). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (1965k [1954]). Zur Disskussion mit Bultmann. In Schriften zur Philosophie (Vol. III, pp. 196–206). München: Kösel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (2015a [1958]). Dankesrede bei der Feier zur Verleihung des großen Verdienstkreuzes der Bundesrepublik Deutschland am 1. März 1958. Studia Phenomenologica, XV, 56–59. [Publication of: HCM 1958bN; English translation: HCM 2015b].

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad-Martius, H. (2015b [1958]). Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany, Acceptance Speech. Studia Phenomenologica, XV, 60–63 (Translation of: HCM 1958bN/HCM 2015a).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlstrom, D. O. (2001). Heidegger’s Concept of Truth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Santis, D. (2015). Wesen, Eidos, Idea: Remarks on the “Platonism” of Jean Héring and Roman Ingarden. Studia Phenomenologica, XV, 155–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deibel, F. (Ed.). (1921). Goethes Gespräche mit Eckermann. Leibzig: Insel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempf, A. (1958). Hedwig Conrad-Martius zum 70. Geburtstag. In Philosophisches Jahrbuch der Görres-Gesellschaft, Festschrift für Hedwig Conrad-Martius 66, Freiburg-München: Karl Alber, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diemer, A. (1965). Edmund Husserl. Meisenheim am Glan: Anton Hain K.G.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dubios, J. M. (1995). Judgment and Sachverhalt: An Introduction to Adolf Reinach’s Phenomenological Realism. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Science+Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebel, G. (1965). Untersuchungen zu einer Realistischen Grundlegung der Phänomenologischen Wesensschau (Diss.). Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farber, M. [letter to Hedwig Conrad-Martius from: 1952. 25 Jan. 1952; 7 Feb. 1952], Conrad-Martiusiana, C.II 2 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feist, R., & Sweet, W. (Eds.). (2003). Husserl and Stein. Washington, DC: Council for Research Values and Philosophy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldes, J. (2013). Alfred von Sybel—A Life Between the Lines. Symposium, 17(2), 204–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feldes, J. (2015). Das Phänomenologenheim, Der Bergzaberner Kreis im Kontext der frühen Phänomenologische Bewegung. Nordhausen: Traugott Bautz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrarello, Susi. 2015. Introduction, Hedwig Conrad-Martius: “Having and Being Existence”. Studia Phenomenologica, XV, 51–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink, E. (1938). Die phänomenologische Philosophie Edmund Husserls in der gegenwärtigen Kritik, Kantstudien 33, 321–383. (Reprinted in: Fink 1966; English translation: Fink 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink, E. (1966). Die phänomenologische Philosophie Edmund Husserls in der gegenwärtigen Kritik (1933). In F. Eugen (Ed.), Studien zur Phänomenologie (1930–1939) (Phaenomenologica 21) (pp. 79–156). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. (Reprint of: Fink 1938. English translation: Fink 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink, E. (1981a). Operative Concepts in Husserl’s Phenomenology. In W. Mckenna, R. M. Harlan, & L. E. Winters (Eds.), Apriori and World, European Contributions to Husserlian Phenomenology (pp. 56–70). The Hague, Boston, and London: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink, E. (1981b). The problem of the phenomenology of Edmund Husserl. In W. Mckenna, R. M. Harlan, & L. E. Winters (Eds.), Apriori and world, European contributions to Husserlian Phenomenology (pp. 21–55). The Hague, Boston, and London: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink, E. (2000). The Phenomenological Philosophy of Husserl Edmund and Contemporary Criticism. In R. O. Elveton. Seattle (Ed.), The Phenomenology of Husserl, Selected Critical Readings (2nd ed.) (pp. 71–139) (Translation of: Fink 1938/Fink 1966).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fréchette, G. (2012). Phenomenology as Descriptive Psychology: The Munich Interpretation. Symposuim, 16 (2), 150–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, M. (1910aN). [Letter to Adolf Reinach from 28 Sep. 1910], Conrad-Martiusiana, D.I 2 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, M. (1910b). [Letter to Edmund Husserl from 28 Sep. 1910]. In Husserl, Edmund. 1994a. Briefwechsel. Husserliana: Edmund Husserl Dokumente, ed. Karl Schuhmann. The Hague, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Band III, Teil 2: Die Münchener Phänomenologen. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 102–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geiger, M. (1933). Alexander Pfänder methodische Stellung. In E. Heller & F. Löw (Eds.), Neue Münchener Philosophiche Abhandelungen (pp. 1–16). Leipzig: Johann Ambrosius Barth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glendinning, S. (2007). In the Name of Phenomenology. London and New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • von Goethe, W. (1840). Zur Farbenlehre. Sämmtliche Werke (Vol. 37). Stuttgart and Tübingen: J. G. Cottascher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habbel, I. (1959). Die Sachverhaltsproblematik in der Phänomenologie und bei Thomas von Aquin (Dissertation). Regensburg: Josef Habbel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, J. G. (1972). Hedwig Conrad-Martius’ Ontological Phenomenology (Dissertation). Chicago, IL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, J. G. (1973, February 15). Hedwig Conrad-Martius. Minerva’s Owl, D-I, 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, J. G. (2020). Hedwig Conrad-Martius’ Ontological Phenomenology. In Rodney K. B. Parker (Ed.), Women in the History of Philosophy and Sciences (Vol. 5). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heffernan, G. (2018). A Tale of Two Schisms: Heidegger’s Critique of Husserl’s Move into Transcendental Idealism. In R. Miron (Ed.), Husserl and Other Phenomenologists (pp. 92–111). London and New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis. (Previously published in: The European Legacy, Toward New Paradigms 21 (5–6), Husserl and Other Phenomenologists, a special issue edited by Ronny Miron, 2016, 556–575). The issue appeared as an independent volume. See: Miron, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegel, G. W. F. (1977). Phenomenology of Spirit (A.V. Miller, Trans.). New York, Toronto, and Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, M. (1927). Sein und Zeit, Jahrbuch für Philosophie und phänomenologische Forschung (Vol. VIII, pp. 1–438). Halle: Max Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, M. (1962 [1927]). Being and Time. (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinemann, F. (1934). Goethe’s Phenomenological Method. Philosophy, IX, 61–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinemann, F. (1960). Erscheinen und Sein—Prologmena zu einer Konkreten Phänomenologie. In R. Wisser (Ed.), Sinn und Sein, Ein philosophisches Symposion (pp. 183–192). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennigfeld, I. (2015). Goethe’s Phenomenological Way of Thinking and the Urphänomen. Goethe Yearbook, 22(1), 143–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herbstrith, W. (Teresia a Matre Dei, OCD [Ordo Carmelitarum Discalceatarum]. (1972). Edith Stein. Freising: Kyrios.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hering, J. (1914–1965N). [correspondence: Letter to HCM], Conrad-Martiusiana, C.II 159 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hering, J. (1921). Bemerkung über das Wesen, die Wesenheit und die Idee. Jahrbuch für Philosophie und phänomenologische Forschung VI, 495–543. Halle: Max Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hering, J. (1959). Das Problem des Seins bei Hedwig Conrad-Martius. Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung XIII (3), 463–469.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herzog-Dürck, J. (1956). Die Frage nach der Zeit. Zur Philosophie der Zeit von Hedwig Conrad-Martius. Nürnberg: Glock und Lutz.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Hildebrand, D. (1973). What Is Philosophy? Chicago, IL: Franciscan Herald Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, R. (1975). Is Transcendental Phenomenology Committed to Idealism? The Monist, 59(1), 98–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, B., & Crowell, S. (2001). The New Yearbook for Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy (NYPPP) 1. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hueglin, T. O. (2010). We All Giggled. A Bourgeois Family. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1913). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie, Allgemeine Einführung in die reine Phänomenologie, Jahrbuch für Philosophie und phänomenologische Forschung I (1), 1–323. Halle: Max Niemeyer. (Reprinted in: Husserl 1952; English translation: Husserl 2012a).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1917). Adolf Reinach. Frankfurter Zeitung (6 Dec. 1917) (Printed also in: Husserl 1987a).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1919). Adolf Reinach. Kantstudien XXIII, 147–49 (Reprinted in: Husserl 1987b, 300–303; English translation: Husserl 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1952 [1913]). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und Phänomenologischen Philosophie: Allgemeine Einführung in die reine Phänomenologie, Erstes Buch, ed. Karl Schuhmann, Husserliana III (1). Haag: Martinus Nijhoff. (English translation: Husserl 2012a).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1959 [1930]). A Letter from Husserl [to Dorion Cairns] (21 March 1930). In H. L. Van Vreda & J. Taminiaux (Eds.), Edmund Husserl 1859–1959—Recueil Commémoratif Publié A L’occasion De Centenaire De La Naissance Du Philosophe (Phaenomenologica 4). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 283–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1966). Zur Phänomenologie des inneren Zeitbewusstseins (1893–1917) (X. Husserliana, Ed.). Rudolf Boehm. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1968). Briefe an Roman Ingarden, Miterläuterungen und Erinnerungen an Husserl (R. Ingarden, Ed.) (Phänomenologica 25). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1970a [1900]). Logical investigations (Vol. I, J. Findlay, Trans.). London and New York: Routledge (Translation of: Husserl 1975).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1970b). The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology: An Introduction to Phenomenological Philosophy (D. Carr, Trans.) Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press (Translation of: Husserl 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1975 [1900]). Logische Untersuchungen, Prolegomena zur reinen Logik, Husserliana XVIII. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. (English translation: Husserl 1970a).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1976). Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie: Eine Einleitung in die phänomenologische Philosophie. Husserliana VI, ed. Walter Biemel. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. (English translation: Husserl 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1983). Obituary notice. Aletheia 3, xi–xiv (Translation of: Husserl 1919/Husserl 1987b).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1984 [1901]). Logische Untersuchungen, Untersuchungen zur Phänomenologie und Theorie der Erkenntnis, Husserliana XIX (1). The Hague, Boston, Lancaster: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. (English translation: Husserl 1970b).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1987a). Adolf Reinach. Aufsätze und Vorträge (1911–1921). Husserliana XXV, 296–299. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff (Reprint of: Husserl 1917).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1987b). Adolf Reinach. Aufsätze und Vorträge (1911–1921). Husserliana XXV, 300–303. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff (Reprint of: Husserl 1919. English translation: Husserl 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1994a). Briefwechsel. Husserliana: Edmund Husserl Dokumente, ed. Karl Schuhmann. The Hague, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Band III, Teil 2: Die Münchener Phänomenologen. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1994b). Briefwechsel. Husserliana: Edmund Husserl Dokumente, ed. Karl Schuhmann. The Hague, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Band III, Teil 3: Die Göttinger Schule. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1994c). Briefwechsel. Husserliana: Edmund Husserl Dokumente, ed. Karl Schuhmann. The Hague, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Band III, Teil 7: Die Wissenschaftlerkorrespondenz. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1994d). Briefwechsel. Husserliana: Edmund Husserl Dokumente, ed. Karl Schuhmann. The Hague, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, Band III, Teil 8: Institutionelle Schreiben. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (1999). Cartesian Meditations: An Introduction to Phenomenology (D. Cairns, Trans.). Dordrecht, Boston, and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (2000 [1933]). Preface [to: Fink 1966/Fink 2000]. In R. O. Elveton (Ed.), The Phenomenology of Husserl, Selected Critical Readings (2nd ed.) (pp. 70–71) Seattle: Noesis Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (2002a [1989]). Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy, second book (R. Rojcewicz & A. Schuwer, Trans.). Dordrecht, Boston, and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (2002b). Logische Untersuchungen. Ergänzungsband. Erster Teil. Entwürfe zur Umarbeitung der VI. Untersuchung und zur Vorrede für die Neuafulage der Logischen Untersuchungen (Sommer 1913) Husserliana XX (1), ed. Ullrich Melle. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (2012a [1913]). Ideas: General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology (W. R. Boyce Gibson, Trans.). London: Routledge (Translation of: Husserl 1952).

    Google Scholar 

  • Husserl, E. (2012b [1931]). Author’s Preface to the English Edition. In Husserl, Edmund. 2012. Ideas, General Introduction to Pure Phenomenology (pp. xxxiv–liii) (W. R. Boyce Gibson, Trans.). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingarden, R. (1972 [1918]). Letter to Edmund Husserl [in German]. In A.-T. Tymieniecka (Ed.), The Later Husserl and the Idea of Phenomenology, Idealism-Realism, Historicity and Nature, Analecta Husserliana: The Yearbook of Phenomenological Research II (ANHU), 357–374.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingarden, R. (1975). On the Motives which Led Husserl to Transcendental Idealism. Trans. Arnór Hannibalsson (Phenomenologica 64). Trans. Arnór Hannibalsson. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingarden, R. (1976 [1918]). The Letter to Husserl about the VI [logical] Investigation and ‘Idealism’. In A.-T. Tymieniecka (Ed.), Ingardeniana: A Spectrum of Specialised Studies Establishing the Field of Research. Analecta Husserliana: The Yearbook of Phenomenological Research IV (ANHU), 419–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaspers, K. (1956). Philosophie, Vol. III: Metaphysik. Berlin, Göttingen, Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koyré, A. (1911–1964N). [correspondence: Letters to HCM], Conrad-Martiusiana, C.II 37 p. [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, H. (1966). Die bekannte Unbekannte, Zur Erinnerung an Hedwig Conrad-Martius (obituary), Süddeutsche Zeitung 5/6 March 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, H. (1969). Phänomenologie und Realität. Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, 23(3), 397–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, H. (1971). Phänomenologie und “wirklich Wirklichkeit”. In H. Kuhn, E. Avé-Lallemant, & R. Gladiator (Eds.), Die Münchener Phänomenologie, Vorträge des Internationalen Kongresses in München, 13–18 April 1971 (pp. 1–7). The Hague.

    Google Scholar 

  • Küng, G. (1972a). Husserl on Pictures and Intentional Objects. The Review of Metaphysics: A Philosophical Quarterly, 26, 670–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Küng, G. (1972b). The World as Noema and as Referent. Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology, 3 (1), 15–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Küng, G. (1984). Roman Ingarden (1893–1970): Ontological Phenomenology. In Herbert Spiegelberg. 1984. The Phenomenological Movement, A Historical Introduction (pp. 223–233), third revised and enlarged edition with the collaboration of Karl Schuhmann (Phaenomenologica 5/6). The Hague, Boston, Lancaster: Martinus Nijhoff, Kluwer Academic publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landgrebe, L. (1949). Phänomenology und Metaphysik, (Aufsatzsammlung). Hamburg: M. Von Schroder.

    Google Scholar 

  • Landgrebe, L. (1963). Der Weg der Phänomenologie, Das Problem Einer Ursprünglichen Erfahrung. Güterslohe: Gred Mohn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lebech, M. (2011). Beginning to Read Stein’s Finite and Eternal Being. In L. Embree, I. Copoeru, D. Moran, & H. Reiner Sepp (Eds.), Phenomenology 2010 4, Selected Essays from Northern Europe Traditions, Transitions and Challenges (pp. 138–154). Bucharest: Zeta Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machnacz, J. (1985). Problematyka ontycznei budowy czlowieka w pimach Hedwig Conrad-Martius (The problem of ontological constitution of man in Hedwig Conrad Martius’ works) (Diss.). Lublin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machnacz, J. (1992). Hedwig Conrad-Martius i Edith Stein, uczennice E. Husserla a filozofia arystotelesowsko-tomistyczna (Hedwig Conrad-Martius and Edith Stein, Husserl’s pupils and Aristotelian-Thomistic Philosophy). Studia Philosophiae Christiana 28, 87–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martius, G.-A. (2002). 1933–1945, Auch das geschah in Deutschland: Martius zum Beispiel, Genealogie. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Familienkunde, 26(51).

    Google Scholar 

  • Martius, G.-A. (2003a). 1933–1945, Auch das geschah in Deutschland: Martius zum Beispiel, Genealogie. Deutsche Zeitschrift für Familienkunde, 26(52).

    Google Scholar 

  • Martius, G.-A. (2003b). 1933–1945, Auch das geschah in Deutschland: Martius zum Beispiel. Blätter zur Geschichte der Familie Martius: Heft 17, Neustadt: Degener.

    Google Scholar 

  • Metzger, A. (1966). Phänomenologie und Metaphysik, Das Problem der Realtivität und seiner Überwindung (2nd ed.). Stuttgart: Neske Pfulling.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miron, R. (2012). Karl Jaspers: From Selfhood to Being, Value Inquiry Book Series. Amsterdam, New York, NY: Rodopi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miron, R. (Ed.). (2018). Husserl and Other Phenomenologists. London and New York: Routledge Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moran, D. (2012). Forward. In E. Husserl, Ideas, Central Introduction to Pure Phenomenology (W. R. Boyce Gibson, Trans.) (pp. xiii–xxxiii). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moran, D., & Szanto, T. (Eds.). (2016). Phenomenology of Sociality Discovering theWe”. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morriston, W. (1976). Intentionality and the Phenomenological Method: A Critique of Husserl’s Transcendental Idealism. Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology, 7(1), 33–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakhnikian, G. (1964). Introduction. In E. Husserl, The Idea of Phenomenology (G. Nakhnikian, Ed., William P. Alston & George Nakhnikian, Trans.) (pp. ix–xxii). The Hague: Martinus Nijhof.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oesterreicher, J. M. (1953). Walls are Crumbling: Seven Jewish Philosophers Discover Christ. London: Hollis and Carter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, R. K. B. (2020). “Über Ontologie”, Ein unveröffentlichtes Manuskript von Hedwig Conrad-Martius zu Husserls Ideen I. In H. Rainer Sepp (Ed.), Natur und Kosmos, Entwürfe der frühen Phänomenologie (pp. 211–216). Nordhausen: Traugott Bautz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker, R. K. B. (2021). The Idealism-Realism Debate and the Great Phenomenological Schism. In R. K. B. Parker (Ed.), The Idealism-Realism Debate in the Early Phenomenological Movement (Contribution to Phenomenology 112) (pp. 1–24). Cham: SpringerInternational Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfänder, A. (1913). Zur Psychologie der Gesinnung. Jahrbuch für Philosophie und phänomenologische Forschung I (1). Halle: Max Niemeyer, 325–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeiffer, A. E. (2005). Hedwig Conrad-Martius, Eine Phänomenologische sicht auf Nature und Welt, Orbis Phenomenologicus. Würzburg: Kӧnigshausen and Neumann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plessner, H. (1959). Husserl in Göttingen. In H. L. van Vreda & J. Taminiaux (Eds.), Edmund Husserl 1859–1959—Recueil Commémoratif Publié A L’occasion De Centenaire De La Naissance Du Philosophe (Phaenomenologica 4) (pp. 29–39). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plümacher, M. (1996). Philosophie nach 1945 in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Hamburg: Rowohlt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach, A. (1907N). [Letter to Theodor Conrad from fall 1907]. Conradiana, B.II [Nachlass]. Bavarian State Archive (BSM) in Munich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach, A. (1913). Die apriorischen Grundlagen des bürgerlichen Rechtes. Jahrbuch für Philosophie und phänomenologische Forschung, I(2), 685–847. Halle: Max Niemeyer. (Reprinted in: Reinach 1921d; Reinach, 1989, 141–278. English trans.: Reinach 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach, A. (1921a). Gesammelte Schriften. Halle: Max Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach, A. (1921b [1914]). Vortrag über Phänomenologie. In A. Reinach (Ed.), Gesammelte Schriften (pp. 379–405). Halle: Max Niemeyer (Reprint of: Reinach 1951; English trans.: Reinach 1968/Reinach 1969).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach, A. (1921c [1911]). Kants Auffassung des Humeschen Problems. In A. Reinach, Gesammelte Schriften (pp. 1–35). Halle: Max Niemeyer. (English trans.: Reinach 1976).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach, A. (1921d). Die Apriorischen Grundlagen des bürgerlichen Rechtes. In A. Reinach, Gesammelte Schriften (pp. 166–350). Halle: Max Niemeyer (Reprint of: Reinach 1913. Rerinted also in: Reinach 1989, 141–278 ; English trans.: Reinach 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach, A. (1951 [1914]). Was ist Phänomenologie? Mit einem Vorwort von Hedwig Conrad-Martius. München: Kösel, 21–72 (Reprint of: Reinach 1921b; English trans.: Reinach Reinach 1921b; Reinach 1951).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach, A. (1968). What Is Phenomenology? (D. Kelly, Trans.). Philosophical Forum 1 (2) (New Series), 231–256. (Translation of: Reinach 1921b/Reinach 1951).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach, A. (1969). Concerning Phenomenology (W. Dallas, Trans.). The Personalist 50 (2), 194–221. [Translation of: Reinach 1921b/Reinach 1951].

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach, A. (1976 [1911]). Kant’s Interpretation of Hume’s Problem (N. J. Mohanty, Trans.). Southwestern Journal of Philosophy, 7(2), 161–188. (Translation of: Reinach 1921c).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach, A. (1983). The Apriori Foundations of Civil Law (J. Crosby, Trans.), Aletheia 3, 1–142. (Trans. of: Reinach 1913/Reinach 1921d).

    Google Scholar 

  • Reinach A. (1989). Sämtliche Werke, Textkritische Ausgabe (2 Vols.) (K. Schuhmann & B. Smith, Eds.). München: Philosophia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricoeur, P. (1967). Husserl: An Analysis of his Phenomenology. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenward, J. (1989). The Phenomenological Ontology of the Göttingen Circle. Analecta Husserliana (ANHU), XXVII, 11–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenward, J. (1993). Theodor Celms (1893–1989). Zur Einführung. In Celms, T. (1993). Der Phaenomenologische Idealismus Husserls Und Andere Schriften 1928–1943, ed. Rozenvalds, J. Berlin, New York, Paris: Peter Lang, 13–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, M. (2007). Husserl, A Guide for the Perplexed. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sander, A. (1997). Conrad-Martius, Hedwig. In U. I. Meyer & H. Bernnet-Vahl (Eds.), Philosophinnen Lexikon (155–159). Leipzig: Reclam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawicki, M. (1997). Body, Text, and Science: The Literacy of Investigative Practices and the Phenomenology of Edith Stein. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schaber, J., OSB. (2003). Phänomenologie und Mönchtum. In S. Loos & H. ZaborowskiLeben (Eds.), Tod und Entscheidung: Studien zur Geistesgeschichte der Weimarer Republik, Beiträge zur politischen Wissenschaft (pp. 71–100). Berlin: Duncker und Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schapp, W. (1959). Erinnerungen an Edmund Husserl. In H. Leo van Vreda & J. Taminiaux (Phaenomenologica 4) (Eds.), Edmund Husserl 1859–1959—Recueil Commémoratif Publié A L’occasion De Centenaire De La Naissance Du Philosophe (pp. 12–25). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scharff, R. C. (2019). Heidegger becoming Phenomenological: Interpreting Husserl through Dilthey, 1916–1925. New York, London: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheler, M. (1973). Selected Philosophical Essays (D. R. Lachterman, Trans.). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuhmann, K. (1973). Husserl über Pfänder: Die Dialektik der Phänomenologie I. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Schuhmann, K. (1977). Husserl-Chronik- Denk- und Lebensweg Edmund Husserls. Dordrecht, Springer Science+Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuhmann, K. (1987). Husserl und Reinach. In K. Mulligan (Ed.), Speech Act and Sachverhalt. Reinach and the Foundation of Realist Phenomenology (pp. 239–256). Dordrecht, Boston, and Lancaster: Springer Science+Business Media, B.V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuhmann, K. (1990). Husserl’s Yearbook. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 50 (supplement), 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuhmann, K., & Smith, B. (1985). Against Idealism: Johannes Daubert vs. Husserl’s “Ideas” I. Review of Metaphysics, A Philosophical Quarterly, 38(4), 763–793.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuhmann, K., & Smith, B. (1987). Adolf Reinach: An Intellectual Biography. In K. Mulligan (Ed.), Speech Act and Sachverhalt. Reinach and the Foundation of Realist Phenomenology (pp. 3–27). Dordrecht, Boston, and Lancaster: Springer Science+Business Media, B.V. [This is an enlarged version of: Schuhmann and Smith, Einleitung 1989].

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuhmann, K., & Smith, B. (1989). Einleitung: Adolf Reinach (1883–1917). In K. Schuhmann & B. SmithReinach Adolf (Eds.), Sämtliche Werke, Textkritische Ausgabe in 2 Bänden (pp. 613–626). Philosophia. München, Hamden and Wien: Philosophia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmücker, F. G. (1956). Die Phänomenologie als Methode der Wesenerkenntnis, unter besondere Berücksichtigung der Auffassung der München-Göttinger Phänomenologenschule (Diss.). München.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, P. J. (2008). Toward the Subjectivity of the Human Person: Edith Stein’s Contribution to the Theory of Identity. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly, 82(1), 161–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seifert, J. (1971). Über die Möglichkeit einer Metaphysik, Die Antwort der ‘Münchener Phänomenologen’ auf E. Husserl’s Transzendentalphilosophie. In H. Kuhn, E. Avé-Lallemant, & R. Gladiator (Eds.), Die Münchener Phänomenologie, Vorträge des Internationalen Kongresses in München, 13–18 April 1971 (pp. 81–104). The Hague.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seifert, J. (1987). Back to Things in Themselves. A Phenomenological Foundation for Classical Realism. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seifert, J. (1995). Was ist Philosophie? Die Antwort der realistischen Phänomenologie. Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, 49(3), 92–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seifert, J. (2004–2005). The Significance of Husserl’s Logical Investigations for Phenomenological Realism. Seminarios de filosofía [artículo de revista] 17–18, 133–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sepp, H. R. (2019). Natur - Kosmos - Spekulation, Ein Einführung. In H. R. Sepp (Ed.), Natur und Kosmos, Entwürfe der frühen Phänomenologie. Nordhausen: Traugott Bautz, 9–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smid, R. N. (1982). “Münchener Phänomenologie”—Zur Frühgeschichte des Begrigffs. In H. Spiegelberg & E. Avé-Lallemant (Eds.), Pfänder-Studien (pp. 109–153). The Hague, Boston, and London: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, D. W., & McIntyre, R. (1971). Intentionality via Intentions. Journal of Philosophy, 68(18), 541–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiegelberg, H. (1959). Perspektivenwandel: Konstitution eines Hesserlbildes. In H. Leo van Vreda & J. Taminiaux (Eds.), (Phaenomenologica 4). Edmund Husserl 1859–1959—Recueil Commémoratif Publié A L’occasion De Centenaire De La Naissance Du Philosophe (pp. 56–63). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiegelberg, H. (1960). The Phenomenological Movement (1st ed.) (Phaenomenologica 5), Vol. 1. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiegelberg, H. (1965). The Phenomenological Movement (2nd ed.). Dordrecht: Springer-Science+Business Media.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Spiegelberg, H. (1975). Doing Phenomenology: Essays on and in Phenomenology (Phaenomenologica 63). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiegelberg, H. (1982). Epoché und Reduktion bei Pfänder und Husserl. In H. Spiegelberg & E. Avé-Lallemant (Eds.), Pfänder-Studien (Phaenomenologica 84) (pp. 3–34). The Hague, Boston, London: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiegelberg, H. (1984). The Phenomenological Movement: A Historical Introduction, 3rd revised and enlarged edition with the collaboration of Karl Schuhmann (Phaenomenologica 5/6). The Hague, Boston, and Lancaster: Martinus Nijhoff, Kluwer Academic publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spiegelberg, H. (1985). Epilogue: For the Third Generation of Phenomenologists Contributing to this Volume. In W. S. Hamrick (Ed.), (Phaenomenologica 92). Phenomenology in Practice and Theory (pp. 251–254). Dordrecht/London/Lancaster: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (1929). Husserls Phänomenologie und die Philosophie des hl. Thomas V. Aquino. Jahrbuch für Philosophie und phaenomenologische Forschung X, Festschrift Edmund Husserl (zum 70 Geburtstag gewidmet). Halle: Max Niemeyer, 315–338. (Reprinted in: Stein 2014, 119–142; English translation: Stein 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (1960). Briefe an Hedwig Conrad-Martius. München: Kӧsel, 11–57, 87–89 (notes).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (1986). Life in a Jewish Family, Her Unfinished Autobiographical Account, L. Gelber and Romaeus Leuven OCD [Ordo Carmelitarum Discalceatarum] Eds., The Collected Works of Edith Stein, Vol. I, trans. Josephine Koeppel, Washington, DC: ICS Publications, Institute of Carmelite Studies. (Translation of: Stein 2002a).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (1993). Self-Portrait in Letters (1916–1942), Collected Works of Edith Stein Vol. V, eds. L. Gelber and Romaeus Leuven, trans. Josephine Koeppel. Washington, DC: ICS Publications, Institute for Carmelite Studies. (Translation of: Stein, 2005a).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (1997). Husserl’s Phenomenology and the Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas. Attempt at a Comparison. In M. Catharine Baseheart (Ed. and Trans.), Person in the World. Introduction to the Philosophy of Edith Stein (pp. 129–144). Dordrecht: Kluwer (Contributions to Phenomenology 27). (Translation of: Stein 1929/Stein 2014, 119–142).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (2001). Selbstbildnis in Briefen III: Briefe an Roman Ingarden, ESGA 4, Bearbeitung und Anmerkungen von Maria Amata Neyer OCD [Ordo Carmelitarum Discalceatarum], Fuβnoten mitbearbeit von Eberhard Avé-Lallemant. Freiburg, Basel and Wien: Herder. (English translation: Stein, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (2002a). Aus dem Leben einer jüdischen Familie: und weitere autobiographische Beiträge, ESGA 1, ed. Neyer Maria Amata OCD [Ordo Carmelitarum Discalceatarum]. Freiburg, Basel and Wien: Herder. (English translation: Stein 1986).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (2002b). Finite and Eternal Being, An Attempt at an Ascent to the Meaning of Being, The Collected Works of Edith Stein, volume IX, trans. K. F. Reinhardt. Washington, DC: ICS Publications, Institute of Carmelite Studies. (Translation of: Stein 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (2005a). Selbstbildnis in Breifen I: Erster Teil 1916–1933, ESGA 2, 3rd Auf., Bearbeitung und Anmerkungen von Maria Amata Neyer OCD [Ordo Carmelitarum Discalceatarum]. Freiburg, Basel and Wien: Herder. (English translation: Stein, 1993, 1–159).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (2005b). Self-Portrait in Letters: Letters to Roman Ingarden, The Collected Works of Edith Stein, volume XII, trans. Hugh Candler Hunt. Washington, DC: ICS Publications, Institute for Carmelite Studies. (Translation of: Stein, 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (2006). Selbstbildnis in Breifen II: Zweiter Teil 1933–1942, ESGA 3, 2nd Auf., Bearbeitung und Anmerkungen von Hanna-Barbara Gerl-Falkovitz. Freiburg, Basel and Wien: Herder. (English translation: Stein, 1993, 159–353 [partial]).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (2013). Endliches und Ewiges Sein, Versuch eines Aufstiegs zum Sinn des Seins, ESGA 11/12, 2nd Auf., Eingeführt und bearbeitet von Andreas Uwe Müller. Freiburg, Basel and Wien: Herder. (English translation: Stein 2002b).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, E. (2014). “Freiheit und Gnade” und weitere Beiträge zu Phänomenologie und Ontologie. (1917 bis 1937), ESGA, 9, eds. Beate Beckmann and Hans Rainer Sepp. Freiburg, Basel and Wien: Herder.

    Google Scholar 

  • Surzyn, J. (2002). Jean Hering and Early Phenomenological Ontology. Analecta Husserliana (ANHU), 80, 74–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tymieniecka, A.-T. (Ed.). (1970). From the Editor. Analecta Husserliana: The Yearbook of Phenomenological Research I (ANHU). Dordrecth: D. Reidel, v–vii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thyssen, J. (1959). Husserls Lehre Von Den ‘Bedeutungen’ Und Das Begriffsproblem. Zeitschrift Für Philosophische Forschung, 13(2), 163–186, 438–458.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Breda, H. L., & Taminiaux, J. (Eds.). (1959). Edmund Husserl 1859–1959: Recueil Commémoratif Publié A L’occasion De Centenaire De La Naissance Du Philosophe (Phaenomenologica 4). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vēgners, U. (2020). Theodor Celms and the “Realism-Idealism” Controversy. In W. Płotka & P. Eldridge (Eds.), Early Phenomenology in Central and Eastern Europe (145–162). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vendrell-Ferran, Í. (2008). Die Emotionen, Gefühle in der realistischen Phänomenologie. Berlin: Akademie.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vendrell-Ferran, Í. (2016). Affective Intentionality, Early Phenomenological Contributions to a New Phenomenological Sociology. In D. Moran & T. Szanto (Eds.), Phenomenology of Sociality Discovering the ‘We’ (pp. 219–233). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidal, J. (1972). Phénoménologie et conversions. Archives de Philosophie 35, 209–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrana, C. (1963). La constituzione ontica degli organismi nel pensiero di H. Conrad- Martius (The Ontic Constitution of Organisms in the Thinking of H. Conrad-Martius) (Diss.). Rome.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walther, G. (1960). Zum Anderen Ufer, Vom Marxismus und Atheismus zum Christentum. Remagen: Leuchter Otto Reichl.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, A., Dempf, A., Meyer, H., et al. (1958). Philosophisches Jahrbuch der Görres-Gesellschaft, Festschrift für Hedwig Conrad-Martius 66. Freiburg-München: Karl Alber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willey, T. E. (1978). Back to Kant: The Revival of Kantianism in German Social and Historical Thought, 1860–1914. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wisser, R. (Ed.). (1960). Sinn und Sein, Ein philosophisches Symposion. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Miron, R. (2023). Introduction. In: Hedwig Conrad-Martius. Women in the History of Philosophy and Sciences, vol 8. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25416-1_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics