Firstness and Phenomenology—Peirce and Husserl on Attitude Change

Chapter

Abstract

Close encounters between Peirce and Husserl elucidate ties between Semiotics, Law and Philosophy. Peirce’s idea of firstness, consequently followed by secondness and thirdness, has been widely discussed in many Peirce texts and interpretations. The idea is a key concept that inspired semiotics. We conclude in hindsight that not thirdness but firstness needs full attention in philosophy and semiotics. Explaining firstness as an attitude inherent to the sign, Peirce refers to phenomenology as a major field of semiotics, so that semiotics can reveal the structure of legal thinking. There are remarkable parallels to this firstness in twentieth century philosophy. We highlight the “Einstellungsänderung”, (attitude change, or change of approach) in Edmund Husserl’s phenomenology, which makes us understand the complex structure of transcendental phenomenology in its close relationship with semiosis and semiotics. Peirce and Husserl accompany and even foreshadow the linguistic turn of modern philosophy and its implicit phenomenology of social relations. We need to decide whether semiotics is only to be applied in legal practice and legal scholarship, or the application be transcended in the law-semiotics relationship by changing its predominance and stimulating an attitude change, for instance as re-engineering law through its semiotic approach. This also depends on the question what materials might determine future legal cases. Semiotics is important where virtual reality, and where dimensions of reality created by nanotechnology play a predominant role in the context of our future cases. The character of firstness changes and highlights the relevance of semiotics.

Keywords

Attitude Change Legal Discourse Transcendental Phenomenology Train Driver Legal Language 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Adorno, Theodor W. 1956. Zur Metakritik der Erkenntnistheorie. Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer.Google Scholar
  2. Apel, Karl-Otto. 1973. Transformation der Philosophie, Band II: Das Apriori der Kommunikationsgemeinschaft. Frankfurt am: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  3. Balkin, Jack M. 1991. The Promise of Legal Semiotics. Texas Law Review, 69, 1831–1852.Google Scholar
  4. Broekman, Jan M. 1963. Phänomenologie und Egologie. Faktisches und Transzendentales Ego bei Edmund Husserl. Phaenomenologica, Bd 12. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  5. Broekman, Jan M. 1974. Structuralism. Moscow, Prague, Paris, Synthese Library, vol. 67. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  6. Broekman, Jan M. 1984. Justice as Equilibrium. Law and Philosophy, 5, 369.Google Scholar
  7. Broekman, Jan M. 1986. Semiology and the Medical Discourse. Methodology and Science, International Journal for the Empirical Study of the Foundations of Science and Their Methodology, XIX(l).Google Scholar
  8. Broekman, Jan M. 1996. Intertwinements of Law and Medicine, Leuven Law Series, vol. 7. Leuven: Leuven University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Clark, Andy. 2003. Natural-Born Cyborgs. Minds, Technologies and the Future of Human Intelligence. Oxford: Oxford U.P.Google Scholar
  10. Colapietro, Vincent M. 1989. Peirce’s Approach to the Self. A Semiotic Perspective on Human Subjectivity. New York, NY: SUNY Series in Philosophy.Google Scholar
  11. Colapietro, Vincent M. 2008. Peircean Semeiotic and Legal Practices: Rudimentary and “Rhetorical” Considerations. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law, 21, 27–49.Google Scholar
  12. De Saussure, Ferdinand. 1915. In eds. Charles Bally and Albert Sechehaye, Cours de linguistique générale. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
  13. De Saussure, Ferdinand. 1983. Course in General Linguistics. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
  14. Deely, John. 1994. Membra Ficte Disjecta. Editorial Introduction to the Electronic Edition of the Collected Papers (CP) of Charles Sanders Peirce.Google Scholar
  15. Ducrot, Oswald and Todorov, Tzvetan. 1972. Dictionnaire Encyclopédique des Sciences du Langage. Paris: Ed. du Seuil.Google Scholar
  16. Dworkin, Ronald. 1977. Taking Rights Seriously. London: Duckworth & Co.Google Scholar
  17. Dworkin, Ronald. 1985. A Matter of Principle. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  18. Dworkin, Ronald. 1986. Law’s Empire. Cambridge, MA: Bellknap Press, Harvard UP.Google Scholar
  19. Eco, Umberto. 1979a. A Theory of Semiotics. Bloomington: Indiana U.P.Google Scholar
  20. Eco, Umberto. 1979b. The Role of the Reader: Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts. Bloomington: Indiana U.P.Google Scholar
  21. Edelman, Bernard. 1973. Le Droit Saisi par la Photographie. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
  22. Edelman, Bernard. 1979. Ownership of the Image. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  23. Greimas, Algirdas J. 1968. The Interaction of Semiotic Constraints. Yale French Studies, 41, 269.Google Scholar
  24. Greimas, Algirdas J. 1970. Du Sens. Essais Sémiotiques. Paris: Du Seuil.Google Scholar
  25. Greimas, Algirdas J. 1983. Du Sens II. Essais Sémiotiques. Paris: Du Seuil.Google Scholar
  26. Husserl, Edmund. 1913. Logische Untersuchungen Band II, 2 vols. Hall a.d.s: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
  27. Husserl, Edmund. 1927. In eds. Palmer and Sheehan, Phemenology, Encyclopaedia Britannica. Dordrecht: Kluwer 1997, pp. 129–261, [Revised Ed. Richard Palmer].Google Scholar
  28. Husserl, Edmund. 1952. Ideen zu einer Reinen Phänomenologie und Phänomenologischen Philosophie Bd. II: Phänomenologische Untersuchungen zur Konstitution. Husserliana, vol. IV. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  29. Husserl, Edmund. 1954. Die Krisis der Europäischen Wissenschaften und die Transzendentale Phänomenologie. Husserliana, vol. VI. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  30. Husserl, Edmund. 1956. Erste Philosophie (1923/24). I: Kritische Ideengeschichte. Husserliana, vol. VII. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  31. Jackson, Bernard S. 1985. Semiotics and Legal Theory. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  32. Jackson, Bernard S. 1988. Law, Fact and Narrative Coherence. Legal Semiotics Monographs. Roby, Merseyside: Deborah Charles Publications.Google Scholar
  33. Jackson, Bernard S. 1996. Making Sense in Jurisprudence. Legal Semiotics Monographs. Liverpool: Deborah Charles Publications.Google Scholar
  34. Kant, Immanuel. 1990. Critique of Pure Reason, tr. J. M. D. Meiklejohn. New York, NY: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  35. Kevelson, Roberta. 1988. The Law as a System of Signs. New York, NY: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kevelson, Roberta. 1996. Peirce, Science, Signs. New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  37. Kristeva, Julia. 1969. Semiotikè. Recherches pour une sémanalyse. Paris: Du Seuil.Google Scholar
  38. Kurzweil, Ray. 2005. The Singularity is Near. When Humans Transcend Biology. New York, NY: Viking.Google Scholar
  39. Lee, Benjamin. 1997. Talking Heads. Language, Metalanguage and the Semiotics of Subjectivity. Durham & London: Duke U.P.Google Scholar
  40. Luhmann, Niklas. 1984. Soziale Systeme. Grundriss einer Allgemeinen Theorie. Frankfurt am: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  41. Massumi, Brian. 2002. Parables for the Virtual. Movement, Affect, Sensation. Durham & London: Duke U.P.Google Scholar
  42. Ogden, Charles K. and Richards, Ivor A. 1923. The Meaning of Meaning. A Study of the Influence of Language upon Thought and of the Science of Symbolism. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & World Inc.Google Scholar
  43. Parker, Kelly A. 1998. The Continuity of Peirce’s Thought. Nashville & London: Vanderbilt U.P.Google Scholar
  44. Paul, Jeremy. 1991. The Politics of Legal Semiotics. Texas Law Review, 69, 1779–1829.Google Scholar
  45. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1931–1935 ed. In eds. Charles Hartshorne and Paul Weiss, The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Pierce, vols. I–VI. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1958 ed. In ed. Arthur W. Burks, The Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Pierce, vols. VII–VIII. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1977. In ed. Charles S. Hardwick, Semiotic and Significas. The Correspondence Between Charles S. Peirce and Victoria Lady Welby. Bloomington: Indiana U.P.Google Scholar
  48. Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1998. The Essential Peirce, Selected Philosophical Writings, vol. 2, (1893–1913) ed. the Peirce Project. Bloomington: Indiana U.P.Google Scholar
  49. Pencak, William A. 1993 History, Signing in: Essays in History and Semiotics. New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  50. Posner, Richard A. 2008. How Judges Think. Boston/Cambridge, MA: Harvard U.P.Google Scholar
  51. Spiegelberg, Herbert. 1957. Husserl’s and Peirce’s Phenomenologies: Coincidence or Interaction. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 17, 170.Google Scholar
  52. Stjernfelt, Frederik. 2007. Diagrammatology: An Investigation on the Borderlines of Phenomenology, Ontology, and Semiotics, vol. 336. Dordrecht: Springer, Synthese Library.Google Scholar
  53. Summers, Robert S. 1982. Instrumentalism and American Legal Theory. Ithaca: Cornell U.P.Google Scholar
  54. Teubner, Gunther. 1989. Recht als Autopoietisches System. Frankfurt am: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  55. Unger, Roberto M. 2007. The Self Awakened. Cambridge: Harvard U.P.Google Scholar
  56. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1958. Philosophical Investigations, tr. G. E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dickinson School of LawPenn State UniversityPennsylvaniaUSA

Personalised recommendations