Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An early interpretation of Husserl's phenomenology: Johannes Daubert and the Logical Investigations

  • Published:
Husserl Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. MaxScheler, “Die deutsche Philosophie der Gegenwart: Zusätze aus den nachgelassenen Manuskripten”, in Manfred S.Frings ed., Gesammelte Werke, Vol. 7 (Bern und München: A. Francke, 1973), p. 328. -All translations are mine.

    Google Scholar 

  2. In 1967, Professor Herbert Spiegelberg arranged for Daubert's posthumous papers to be deposited in the Bavarian State Library in Munich. After that the papers were classified and catalogued by Dr. Eberhard Avé-Lallemant (see his Die Nachlässe der Münchener Phänomenologen in der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek (Catalogus codicum scriptorum Bibliothecae Monacensis, tomus X, pars I) (Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1975), pp. 125–138). In 1976, Prof. Schuhmann succeeded in deciphering Daubert's shorthand. From 1979 to 1983, the State University of Utrecht funded a research project under the supervision of Prof. Schuhmann for the transcription of and the research into Daubert's manuscripts. Cf. my article “Zwei Briefe von Johannes Daubert an Edmund Husserl aus dem Jahr 1907”, Husserl Studies 1 (1984), pp. 143 ff. The present paper too results from this research project.

  3. Quoted from KarlSchuhmann, Husserl-Chronik: Denk-und Lebensweg Edmund Husserls, Husserliana Dokumente, Vol. I (Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, 1977), p. 72.

    Google Scholar 

  4. HerbertSpiegelberg, The Phenomenological Movement: A Historical Introduction, Phaenomenologica 5/6 (The Hague/Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff, 19823), p. 169.

    Google Scholar 

  5. MoritzGeiger, “Alexander Pfänders methodische Stellung”, in E.Heller and F.Löw, eds., Neue Münchener Philosophische Abhandlungen: Alexander Pfänder zum sechzigsten Geburtstag (Leipzig: Johannes Abrosius Barth, 1933), p. 4.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Daubertiana A II 3, note-book Psychologica, p. 91. The term “phenomenological” occurs also on pages 64 and 70 of this note-book.

  7. See Theodor Lipps, “Psychische Vorgänge und psychische Causalität”, Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane 25 (1901), pp. 161 ff. This article was received by the editors on 19 December 1990.

  8. TheodorLipps, “Inhalt und Gegenstand; Psychologie und Logik”, in Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-philologischen und der historischen Klasse der K.B. Akademie der Wissenschaften. Vol. 1905 (München: K.B. Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1906), p. 556. Lipps strangely-does not discuss Hegel in this context, although he clearly adopts this expression from him.

    Google Scholar 

  9. For some preliminary information about this see my article “‘Münchener Phänomenologie’: Zur Frühgeschichte des Begriffs”, in H. Spiegelberg and E. Avé-Lallemant, eds., Pfänder-Studien, Phaenomenologica 84 (The Hague/Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff, 1982), pp. 116 ff.

  10. Cf. Theodor Lipps, “Fortsetzung der ‘Psychologischen Streitpunkte’”, Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane 31 (1903), p. 78. This article was received by the editors on 20 October 1902.

  11. The lecture is in Daubertiana A I 4/1-15. -Quotations from the Daubertiana manuscripts are given in the text by referring to file, page number, and recto-/verso-markings. Quotations from Logische Untersuchungen. Zweiter Theil: Untersuchungen zur Phänomenologie und Theorie der Erkenntnis (Halle a.S.: Max Niemeyer, 1901) are abbreviated: LU II. -In 1984, a new critical edition of this text edited by Ursula Panzer was published as Hua XIX.

  12. Leipzig: W. Engelmann, 1902. In the same year there appeared Karl Heim's book Psychologismus oder Antipsychologismus? Entwurf einer erkenntnistheoretischen Fundamentierung der modernen Energetik (Berlin: C.A. Schwetschke und Sohn, 1902). According to its preface, this work was finished in October 1902. So Daubert could not refer to it in these manuscripts which were written in July of that year.

  13. H. Spiegelberg, loc. cit.

  14. Quoted from K. Schuhmann, “Ein Brief Husserls an Theodor Lipps”, Tijdschrift voor Filosofie 39 (1977), p. 141 f.

  15. Cf. K. Schuhmann, Husserl-Chronik, p. 81; and his work, Husserl über Pfänder, Phaenomenologica 56 (Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, 1973), pp. 20 ff.

  16. Hans Büttner, “Die phänomenologische Psychologie Alexander Pfänders”, Archiv für die gesamte Psychologie 94 (1935), p. 317.

  17. See K. Schuhmann, Husserl über Pfänder, p. 17.

  18. Cf. E. Avé-Lallemant, Die Nachlässe der Münchener Phänomenologen in der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek, p. 16.

  19. Hans Cornelius, “Psychologische Prinzipienfragen”, Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane. I. Abteilung. Zeitschrift für Psychologie 42 (1906), p. 401.

  20. Cf. my article “‘Münchener Phänomenologie’: Zur Frühgeschichte des Begriffe”, p. 123 f.

  21. See MoritzGeiger, Methodologische und experimentelle Beiträge zur Quantitätslehre (Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann, 1906), p. 31, note 1 (cf. p. IV) = “Methodologische und experimentelle Beiträge zur Quantitätslehre”, Psychologische Untersuchungen 1 (1907), p. 355, note 1.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Reinach's letters to Conrad are in the Bavarian State Library in Munich (Conradiana B II: Reinach; cf. E. Avé-Lallemant, loc. cit., p. 169). Copies of them lie in the Husserl archives in Louvain, Belgium.

  23. Theodor Conrad's copy of Daubert's letter lies in Conradiana B II: Daubert (cf. E. Avé-Lallemant, loc. cit.).

  24. Cf. Conradiana B II: Reinach and Conradiana A V 1 (cf. E. Avé-Lallemant, loc. cit., pp. 166 and 169).

  25. H. Spiegelberg, The Phenomenological Movement, p. 233.

  26. K. Schuhmann, Husserl-Chronik, p. 89.

  27. See ElmarHolenstein, “Einleitung des Herausgebers”, in Hua XVIII, XXXVII; and H.Spiegelberg, The Context of the Phenomenological Movement, Phaenomenologica 80 (The Hague/Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff, 1981), p. 108 f. and p. 116, note 4.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Cf. H.Spiegelberg, Phaenomenologica 5/6 (The Hague/Boston/London: Martinus Nijhoff, 19823), pp. 130 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  29. See Daubert's draft for a letter to Husserl of August 1907, which I published in: “Zwei Briefe von Johannes Daubert an Edmund Husserl aus dem Jahr 1907”, loc. cit.; quotation p. 150. Brentano himself wrote about the conversations with Daubert in a letter to Hugo Bergmann, in which he called Daubert Husserl's “main defender (Hauptverfechter)” in Munich, cf. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 7 (1946/47), p. 96.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Cf. K. Schuhmann, loc. cit., pp. 155 and 183; and Ursula Panzer, “Einleitung der Herausgeberin”, in Hua XIX, XXII ff.

  31. See Daubertiana 5/118r cf. 5/126r. On Volkelt's concept of the “transsubjective” cf.Erfahrung und Denken: Kritische Grundlegung der Erkenntnistheorie (Hamburg und Leipzig: Leopold Voss, 1886), pp. 42, 139 ff., 159 ff., 188 ff. and 542 f.

  32. See Daubertiana A I 5/120r; 5/82r, 5/97v, and 5/124r.

  33. Cf. my dissertation ‘Mein reines Ich' und die Probleme der Subjektivität: Eine Studie zum Anfang der Phänomenologie Edmund Husserls (Phil. Diss. Köln, 1978), pp. 20 ff.

  34. On the “relation of similarity” cf. Daubertiana A I 1/24-29. See also my article “Ähnlichkeit als Thema der Münchener Lipps-Schule”, Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung 37 (1983), pp. 606 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Cf. K. Schuhmann, Husserl über Pfänder, p. 140.

  36. Cf. Ludwig, Busse, “Rezension: Edmund Husserl, Logische Untersuchungen” Zeitschrift für Psychologie und Physiologie der Sinnesorgane 33 (1903), pp. 153 ff.

  37. Cf. H. Cornelius, “Psychologische Prinzipienfragen”, p. 406.

  38. Cf. MartinHeidegger, Zur Sache des Denkens (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 1969), p. 83.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Cf. my dissertation ‘Mein reines Ich' und die Probleme der Subjektivität’, pp. 10 ff. and 44 ff.

  40. Cf. K. Heim, Psychologismus oder Antipsychologismus?, pp. 17 f. and 53 f.

  41. On Husserl's answer to Daubert see K. Schuhmann, Husserl über Pfänder, p. 50.

  42. Cf. Schuhmann, loc. cit., p. 130.

  43. The term “Zumutesein” is very difficult to express in English. It means a prereflexive, non-intentional source of cognition. It is a cast of mood which founds (“fundiert”) our thinking and feeling, so I have chosen to render it “Being-in-a-mood”.

  44. In his article “Husserl and the Logic of Questions”, Analecta Husserliana 14 (1983). p. 387, C. Struyker Boudier quotes this statement of Husserl, but he is not aware of the fact that there are some problems in interpreting Husserl which can only be solved by probing into new sources of Husserl's thinking, such as Johannes Daubert's notes. Günther Pöltner does not take Husserl into account in his study Zu einer Phänomenologie des Fragens: Ein fragend-fraglicher Versuch Symposion 37 (Freiburg/München: Karl Alber, 1972). Pöltner is not able to fulfill the expectations which he evokes by this rather pretentious title.

  45. This manuscript is reproduced in E. Avé-Lallemant, Die Nachlässe der Münchener Phänomenologen in der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek, p. 132. On the interpretation of the manuscript cf. my article “‘Münchener Phänomenologie’: Zur Frühgeschichte des Begriffs”, pp. 131 ff.

  46. On Husserl's concept of intentionality and his critics cf. J.N. Mohanty, “Husserl's Concept of Intentionality”, Analecta Husserliana 1 (1971), pp. 100 ff.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Cf. Daubertiana 5/83v, 5/95v, 5/96r, 5/98r, 5/122, and 5/124r.

  48. Martin Heidegger, Sein und Zeit, §§ 29, 30; Otto Friedrich Bollnow, Das Wesen der Stimmungen (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 1980o).

  49. Cf. K. Schuhmann, Husserl über Pfänder, pp. 162 ff.

  50. Husserl's letters to Daubert are in the Husserl archives in Louvain, Belgium. Copies of them lie in the Bavarian State Library in Munich (Daubertiana B II: Husserl; cf. E. Avé-Lallemant, loc. cit., p. 136).

  51. Cf. K.Schuhmann, “Structuring the Phenomenological Field: Reflections on a Daubert Manuscript”, in W.S.Hamrick ed. Phenomenology in Practice and Theory Phaenomenologica 92 (Dordrecht/Boston/Lancaster: Martinus Nijhoff, 1985), pp. 3 ff.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Universität Köln, Köln, Germany

    Reinhold N. Smid

Authors
  1. Reinhold N. Smid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smid, R.N. An early interpretation of Husserl's phenomenology: Johannes Daubert and the Logical Investigations . Husserl Stud 2, 267–290 (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00430970

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00430970

Keywords

Search

Navigation