The Later Husserl and the Idea of Phenomenology: Idealism-Realism, Historicity and Nature Papers and Debate of the International Phenomenological Conference Held at the University of Waterloo, Canada, April 9–14, 1969

371 Pages·1972·22.15 MB·English

by  Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka (auth.)

THE LATER HUSSERL AND THE
IDEA OF PHENOMENOLOGY
ANALECTA HUSSERLIANA
THE YEARBOOK OF PHENOMENOLOGICAL RESEARCH
VOLUME II
Editor:
ANNA-TERESA TYMIENIECKA
THE LATER HUSSERL AND
THE IDEA OF
PHENOMENOLOGY
Idealism-Realism, Historicity and Nature
PAPERS AND DEBATE OF THE INTERNATIONAL
PHENOMENOLOGICAL CONFERENCE
HELD AT THE UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO, CANADA,
APRIL 9-14, 1969
Edited by
ANNA-TERESA TYMIENIECKA
I
D.REIDEL PUBLISHING COMPANY DORDRECHT-HOLLAND
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 78-25369
ISBN-I3: 978-94-010-2884-4 e-ISBN-13: 978-94-010-2882-0
DOl: 10.1007/978-94-010-2882-0
All Rights Reserved
Copyright © 1972 by D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland
Softcover reprint of the hardcover 1st edition 1972
No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint,
microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements VII
INA UG URAL LECTURE
ANNA-TERESA TYMIENIECKA / Phenomenology Reflects upon
Itself. II: The Ideal of the Universal Science: the Original
Project of HusserI Reinterpreted with Reference to the
Acquisitions of Phenomenology and the Progress of Contem-
porary Science. 3
Address (Professor Klibansky on April 10, 1969) 18
PART I / THE LATER HUSSERL
ROMAN INGAR DEN / What is New in HusserI's 'Crisis' 23
DALLAS LASKEY / Ingarden's Criticism of HusserI 48
FRED KERSTEN / On Understanding Idea and Essence in HusserI
and Ingarden 55
DISCUSSION 64
JOSEPH J. KOCKELMANS / Phenomenologico-Psychological and
Transcendental Reductions in HusserI's 'Crisis' 78
ANDRZEJ P6LTAWSKI / Constitutive Phenomenology and Inten-
tional Objects 90
ALPHONSO LlNGIS / Hyletic Data 96
DISCUSSION 102
GERD BRAND / The Material Apriori and the Foundation for its
Analysis in HusserI 128
H. L. V AN BREDA / The Actual State of the Work on HusserI's
Inedita: Achievements and Projects 149
DISCUSSION 160
VI T ABLE OF CONTENTS
PART II / PHENOMENOLOGY AND HERMENEUTICS
H.G.GADAMER / The Science ofthe Life-World 173
K. KUYPERS / The Sciences of Man and the Theory of Husserl's
Two Attitudes 186
T.KISIEL / Repetition in Gadamer's hermeneutics 196
GUIDO KUNG / Ingarden on Language and Ontology (A Compari-
son with some Trends in Analytic Philosophy) 204
DISCUSSION 218
PART III/PHENOMENOLOGY AND
NATURAL SCIENCE
ELISABETH STROKER / Edmund Husserl's Phenomenology as
Foundation of Natural Science 245
HENRY ELKIN / Towards a Developmental Phenomenology:
Transcendental-Ego and Body-Ego 258
ERLING ENG / Body, Consciousness, and Violence 267
H.PIETERSMA / The Concept of Horizon 278
ULRICH CLAESGES / Intentionality and Transcendence: On the
Constitution of Material Nature 283
DISCUSSION 292
COMPLEMENTARY ESSAYS
I.N.MOHANTY / A Note on the Doctrine of Noetic-Noematic
Correlation 317
TH.DE BOER / The Meaning of Husserl's Idealism in the Light of
His Development 322
LOTHAR ELEY / Life-World Constitution of Propositional Logic
and Elementary Predicate Logic 333
ANNEX
Roman Ingarden's Letter to Edmund Husserl 357
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanks are due to Mr. John Levonik, Instructor in Philosophy, for his
expert and dedicated help in transcribing the tapes of the proceedings of
the conference and to the Polish Academy of Science, Warszawa for their
kind permission to publish the original letter of Roman Ingarden to
Husserl.
Thanks are also due to the Canada Council and to the University of
Waterloo for a grant of funds in support of the conference.
Most of all, however, this volume owes much to Prof. Lawrence
Haworth, Chairman of the Philosophy Department of the University of
Waterloo. Prof. Haworth took an active part in the organization, con
duct and publication of the conference, which would not have succeeded
without him.
INAUGURAL LECTURE
ANNA-TERESA TYMIENIECKA
PHENOMENOLOGY REFLECTS UPON ITSELF*, II
The ideal of the universal science: the original project of Husserl
reinterpreted with reference to the acquisitions ofp henomenology
and the progress of contemporary science.
Opening this conference I will ask a paradoxical question the answer to
which determines the scope, the significance and the aim of our gathering:
Is phenomenology still alive?
It is quite clear that the great wave of philosophical inspiration which
has radiated from phenomenology for the last three decades, exercising
a sort of hegemony all over the European continent and beyond, and
penetrating all the fields of human endeavour, has recently lost in intensity
and vitality, while the new wave of interest in phenomenology which is
now visible in the Western Hemisphere has not yet produced mature
fruits. There is certainly a considerable number of scholars in philosophy
as well as in other fields still working along phenomenological lines, but
the question which I have put at the outset has a deeper meaning.
What is at stake is not a restricted historical work in relation to the
past of the phenomenological movement, or some limited pursuit to
elucidate phenomenologically formulated problems, both of which are
certainly important endeavours but would be either what Austin called
'polishing the tombs' or would remain restricted to individual pursuits,
whereas phenomenology as inaugurated by Edmund Husserl and under
taken by his immediate disciples has raised a vaster claim. As we well
know, it was meant not only as a philosophia prima but also as a universal
science.
It is as a vast project of universal, fundamental inquiry to be carried on
by a group of scholars, each in his own sector, that phenomenology has
been conceived, has received the basic formulation of its task, field of
research, and methods and has been taken up by philosophers and
scholars. However, as it is well known, the very enthusiasm which made
it radiate led to such a diversification of tasks, differentiation of ap
proaches, ways of procedure, points of view and conclusions and termi
nated in such disparate types of discourse, formulation of problems and
Tymieniecka (ed.). Analecta Husserliana. Vol. II. 3-17. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright <0 1972 by D. Reidel Publishing Company. Dordrecht-Holland.
4 ANNA-TERESA TYMIENIECKA
linguistic expression that we may ask ourselves whether this actual,
concrete accomplishment of the HusserIian inspiration corresponds in any
sense to his original project of phenomenology as a universal science
which has been initiated and carried on at least at the time of the G6ttingen
School. HusserI himself, having in his later development switched to a
historical, that is genetico-transcendental foundation of phenomenology,
seems to have despaired of his initial aspiration, which then appeared to
him as an unfulfilled dream.
Even if we could admit that there are criteria by which the phenomeno
logical work being presently carried on still falls into this initial framework,
we have to ask whether the present weakening of its vitality is not a sign
that the task proposed by HusserI did not contain within itself the germ to
fulfil its promise.
The question then which I propose for your attention is: 'How does
phenomenology stand today with respect to its original proposal of a
fundamental, universal science?'
At this basic level of consideration I challenge the contention that
phenomenology has come to the end of its essential development. I will
try, on the contrary, to establish that precisely now, when the two great
lines of phenomenological inquiry outlined by Husserl, the eidetic and
the transcendental, have been fully developed by himself and his followers,
we enter into a new, self-reflective and self-critical phase of research.
Comparable to that of the progress in science, which points out further
perspectives into ever deeper dimensions of man's transaction with the
universe, this new phase establishes phenomenology as an open field of
continuous philosophical scholarship.
It has still to be seen whether this work at the level of foundations can
correspond to the aspiration and claim of a universal science; for can
philosophy ever satisfy its postulates?
Raising the question of the validity of HusserI's initial project regarding
the task of phenomenology, we have to immediately point out that the
contemporary development of scientific inquiry opens up a different and
larger perspective of its requirements than the one at the end of the
nineteenth century within which it was conceived. With science having
evolved and changed its own criteria for validity, adequacy and truth,
requirements demanded of philosophy to be at the same time its founda
tion and a 'science' itself take on a transformed form.