The Living Body and its Position in Metaphysics: Merleau-Ponty’s Dialogue with Descartes

  • Sara Heinämaa
Part of the Contributions to Phenomenology book series (CTPH, volume 49)


The Cartesian idea of the human body as a human non-closed, open inasmuch as governed by thought—is perhaps the most profound idea of the union of the soul and the body. It is the soul intervening in a body that is not of the in itself [...], that can be a body and living—human only by reaching completion in “view of itself which is thought [...] (Merleau-Ponty 1964b, 288/234).1


Living Body Epistemological Principle Extended Matter Principal Location Pure Thought 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alanen, L.: Descartes’s Concept of Mind. Harvard University Press, 2003.Google Scholar
  2. Aristotle: De Anima, trans. by J.A. Smith. Oxford: Claredon Press, 1931.Google Scholar
  3. Barbaras, R.: Le tournant de l’expérience: Recherches sur la philosophie de Merleau-Ponty. Paris: Vrin, 1998.Google Scholar
  4. Dastur, F.: Chair et langage: Essais sur Merleau-Ponty. Fougères: Encre marine, 2001.Google Scholar
  5. Derrida, J.: Edmund Husserl’s Origin of Geometry: An Introduction, trans. by J. P. Leavey, jr. New York: Nicholas Hays, [1962] 1978.Google Scholar
  6. Derrida, J.: La voix et le phénomène. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1967.Google Scholar
  7. Descartes, R. [AT]: Œuvres de Descartes I-XII. Rev. ed. Ed. by Ch. Adam & P. Tannery. Paris: Vrin/C.N.R.S., [1964-1976] 1996.Google Scholar
  8. Descartes, R. [CSM]: The Philosophical Writings of Descartes I-III, trans. by J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, & D. Murdoch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984-1991.Google Scholar
  9. Dillon, Martin: Merleau-Ponty’s Ontology. Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  10. Fredlund, A. P.: “Descartes’ Merleau-Pontian meditations.” Paper presented in the 36th annual conference of The Society of Phénomenological and Existentialist Philosophy, Lexington, 1997.Google Scholar
  11. Frege, G.: #x201C;Das Gedanke.” Beiträge zur Philosophie des deutschen Idealismus I, 1918, 58–77.Google Scholar
  12. Gaukroger, S.: Cartesian Logic: An Essay on Descartes’ Conception of Inference. Oxford: Claredon Press, 1989.Google Scholar
  13. Gaukroger, S.: “The nature of abstract reasoning: Philosophical aspects of Descartes’ work in algebra.” In J. Cottingham (ed.): The Cambridge Companion to Descartes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. Heidegger, M.: Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, [1927] 1993.Google Scholar
  15. Heidegger, M.: Vorträge und Aufsätze. Pfüllingen: Verlag Günter Neske, [1954] 1990.Google Scholar
  16. Heidegger, M.: Der Satz vom Grund. Pfüllingen: Verlag Günter Neske, 1957.Google Scholar
  17. Heinämaa, S.: “Wonder and (sexual) difference: Cartesian radicalism in phenomenological thinking.” In T. Aho & M. Yrjönsuuri (eds.): Norms and Modes of Thinking in Descartes. Acta Philosophica Fennica 64. Helsinki, 1999.Google Scholar
  18. Heinämaa, S.: “From decisions to passions: Merleau-Ponty’s interpretation of Husserl’s reduction.” In T. Toadvine & L. Embree (eds.): Merleau-Ponty’s Reading of Husserl. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer, 2002.Google Scholar
  19. Heinämaa, S.: Towards a Phenomenology of Sexual Difference: Husserl, Merleau-Ponty, Beauvoir. Lanham, Boulder, New York, London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.Google Scholar
  20. Husserl, E.: Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie, Erstes Buch: Allgemeine Einführung in die reine Phänomenologie. Husserliana III, 1-2. Ed. by K. Schuhmann. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, [1913] 1976.Google Scholar
  21. Husserl, E.: Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie, Zweites Buch: Phänomenologische Untersuchungen zur Konstitution. Husserliana IV. Ed. M. Bimel. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, 1952.Google Scholar
  22. Husserl, E.: Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenshaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie: Eine Einleitung in die phänomenologische Philosophie. Husserliana VI. Ed. by W. Biemel. Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, 1954.Google Scholar
  23. Koivuniemi, M.: “The Cartesian union of a mind and a body—a genuine unity.” Paper presented in Actions and Passions in Early Modern Philosophy, Department of Philosophy, University of Helsinki, 2002.Google Scholar
  24. Kwant, R.C.: The Phenomenological Philosophy of Merleau-Ponty, Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, Louvain: Editions E. Nauwelaerts, 1963.Google Scholar
  25. Madison, G. B.: “Flesh as otherness.” In G. A. Johnson & M. B. Smith (eds.): Ontology and Alterity in Merleau-Ponty. Evaston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press 1990.Google Scholar
  26. Marion, J.-L.: “Cartesian metaphysics and the role of the simple natures,” trans. by J. Cottingham. In J. Cottingham (ed.): The Cambridge Companion to Descartes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  27. Merleau-Ponty, M.: Phénoménologie de la perception. Paris: Gallimard, [1945] 1993; Phenomenology of Perception, trans. by C. Smith. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1995.Google Scholar
  28. Merleau-Ponty, M.: Sens et non-sens. Paris: Gallimard, [1947] 1995; Sense and Non-Sense, trans. by H. L. Dreyfus & P. A. Dreyfus. Evaston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1964.Google Scholar
  29. Merleau-Ponty, M.: Signes. Paris: Gallimard, [1960] 1998; Signs, trans. by R. C. McCleary. Evaston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, [1964] 1987.Google Scholar
  30. Merleau-Ponty, M.: L’Œil et l’esprit. Paris: Gallimard, [1961] 1964a; “Eye and mind,” trans. by C. Dallery. In J. M. Edie (ed.): The Primacy of Perception and Other Essays on Phenomenological Psychology, the Philosophy of Art, History and Politics. Evaston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1964.Google Scholar
  31. Merleau-Ponty, M.: Le visible et l’invisible. Ed. by C. Lefort. Paris: Gallimard, 1964b; The Visible and the Invisible, trans. by A. Lingis. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  32. Merleau-Ponty, M.: La Nature: Notes cours du Collège de France. Ed. by D. Séglard. Paris: Seuil, [1968] 1994.Google Scholar
  33. Merleau-Ponty, M.: L’union de l’âme et du corps: Chez Malbranche, Biran et Bergson, Notes prises au cours de Maurice Merleau-Ponty à l’École Normale Supérieure (1947-1948). Ed. by J. Deprun. Paris: Librairie Philosophique J.Vrin, 1997; The Incarnate Subject: Malebranche, Brian, and Bergson on the Union of Body and Soul, trans. by P. B. Milan, ed. by A. G. Bjelland Jr. and P. Burke. New York: Humanity Books, 2001.Google Scholar
  34. Moran, D.: An Introduction to Phenomenology. London and New York: Routledge, 2000.Google Scholar
  35. Peirce, C. S.: “Proem, The rules of philosophy.” In Change, Love, and Logic: Philosophical Essays. Ed. by M. R. Cohen. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, [1868] 1998.Google Scholar
  36. Plato: Alcibiades, trans. by D.S. Hutchinson. In Complete Works. Ed. by J. M. Cooper. Indianapolis, Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, 1997a.Google Scholar
  37. Plato: Republic, trans. by G.M.A Crube, rev. C.D.C Reeve. In Complete Works. Ed. by J. M. Cooper. Indianapolis, Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, 1997b.Google Scholar
  38. Reuter, M.: “Questions of sexual difference and equality in Descartes’ philosophy.” In T. Aho & M. Yrjönsuuri (eds.): Norms and Modes of Thinking in Descartes. Acta Philosophica Fennica 64. Helsinki, 1999.Google Scholar
  39. Reuter, M.: Questions of the Body, Sexual Difference and Equality in Cartesian Philosophy, Doctoral dissertation. Department of Philosophy, University of Helsinki, 2000. 1. ai]Reuter,_M.: “Existerar det ‘Cartesianiska’ subjektet? Fenomenologiska och feministiska perspektiv på René Descartes’ subjektuppfattning.” Unpublished manuscript, 2002. 1. Rozemond, M.: Descartes’ Dualism. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: Harvard University Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  40. Ryle, G.: The Concept of Mind. Harmonds worth: Penguin, [1949] 1980.Google Scholar
  41. Sartre, J.-P.: L’être et le néant: Essai d’ontologie phénoménologique. Paris: Gallimard, 1943.Google Scholar
  42. Shapiro, L.: “Élisabeth et Descartes: La maladie, le remède et la nature féminine.” In E. Beranger, G. Castro, & M.-L. Paoli (eds.): Femme et nature. Bordeaux: Maison des Sciences de l’Homme d’Aquitaine, 1997.Google Scholar
  43. Shapiro, L.: “Princess Elisabeth and Descartes: The union of soul and body and the practice of philosophy.” In G. Lloyd (ed.): Feminism and History of Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  44. Slatman, J.: “L‘impensé de Descartes: Lecture des notes de cours sur L‘tontologie cartésienne et l’ontologie d’aujourd’hui.” In Chiasmi International. Paris: Vrin, 2001, 295–308.Google Scholar
  45. Smith, M. B.: “Transcendence in Merleau-Ponty.” In D. Olkowski & J. Morley (eds.): Merleau-Ponty, Inferiority and Exteriority, Psychic Life and the World. New York: SUNY, 1999.Google Scholar
  46. Toadvine, T.: “The art of doubting.” Philosophy Today 41, 1997, 545–553.Google Scholar
  47. Tollefsen, D.: “Princess Elisabeth and the problem of mind-body interaction.” Hypatia 14/3, 1999, 59–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wittgenstein, L.: Über Gewissheit—On Certainty. Ed. by G.E.M. Anscombe and G.H. vonWright, trans. by D. Paul and G.E.M. Anscombe. New York, San Francisco, London: Harper & Row, [1969] 1972.Google Scholar
  49. Yrjönsuuri, M: “The Scholastic background of Cogito ergo sum.” In T. Aho & M. Yrjönsuuri (eds.): Norms and Modes of Thinking in Descartes. Acta Philosophica Fennica 64, 1999, 47–70.Google Scholar
  50. Yrjönsuuri, M.: “Soul as an entity.” Unpublished manuscript, 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sara Heinämaa
    • 1
  1. 1.Academy of FinlandUniversity of HelsinkiFinland

Personalised recommendations