Phenomenology

Phenomenology Explained

David Detmer – Husserl

Detmer, David. “Phenomenology Explained: From Experience to Insight.” Chicago: Open Court Publishing Company. 2013. Print.

Ø  Intro

o   Phenomenology – the study of the essential structures of experience.

§  Objects of experience.

§  Actions of consciousness

o   Objects themselves can be explored through aspects they maintain,

§  Rather than by causal events that “prove” their existence.

o   Objects can be:

§  Objects, symbols, emotions, modes of though and abstract ideas.

o   Not all questions can be approached through science or language.

§  Phenomenology questions the methods and mediums of approach.

Ø  Husserl – Background

o   Husserl when further than the subject.

§  He questions the nature of things meaning,

§  Evidence, truth,

§  And their relations.

§  He returned to questions and was a

·      Perpetual beginner.

o   Consciousness

§  The realm of being aware of things,

§  Perceiving, feeling

§  Having subjective experiences

o   Husserl separated the idea of thing from the value of a thing.

§  Value forming

·      A hopeless subjective interpretation.

·      Formed from opinion, and

o   Truth takes the form of local consensus and tradition.

§  He moved experience from third person observation to first person experience.

§  He viewed “objective,” in the social sense, as nothing more than subjective consensus.

o   Husserl wanted to form an approach,

§  That combines the subject matter and first person standpoint of the artist with

§  Evidence based truth orientation of the scientist.

o   Husserl’s phenomenology

§  Looks at the object,

§  Looks at consciousness, and

§  Correlates the two.

Ø  Early Husserl

o   His early work approached issues of logic and mathematics.

§  They have the unique status of being real,

·      But living in a reality form physical things.

§  He questioned how we formed knowledge from them.

o   Husserl noted,

§  Mathematical truths only work in a closed system.

·      It is the rules, and their adherence to them, that make them real, make them meaningful.

·      Conditions and causality are predefined.

·      The rules are aprior.

§  Psychological truths are aposteriori

·      There is no expectation of absolute correctness.

·      All observation is tentative, and

o   We must be open to incomplete or inaccurate conclusions.

§  Logic and mathematics cannot be reduced to psychological truths.

·      They are two distinct things.

·      Mathematics is a structure of experience,

o   Much like language.

§  We need an explanation for the

·      Vague, confused, unfamiliar, controversial, or things with weak evidence.

o   It needs to be explained by the clear and concise.

o   The unfamiliar is illuminated by the familiar.

o   The unknown by the known.

o   The weak evidence by the strong evidence.

§  Things go wonky when the unfamiliar,

·      Is explained by something unfamiliar,

·      Or something more obscure.

§  The point is that:

·      Mathematics is precise, and the

·      Psychological is vague and imprecise,

·      And it is a mistake to explain one with the other.

§  Laws of logic are prescriptive and deal with what ought to be.

·      Whereas psychological laws deal with what is.

§  Logic and math is concerned about the study of objects,

·      But now how we think about the objects.

o   Eidetic Reduction

§  Removing non-relevant details of an object until,

·      Only the essential details remain.

o   When we meet someone we abstract categories and assign our biases to them.

§  Sex, gender, young, old, race, etc…

§  We understand the world through our general associations and dispositions of those associations.

§  *** Each bias is a loaded understanding.

o   Phenomenology deals with the essence o things.

§  Essence is the “essential principles” that are widely accessible and the foundation of understanding.

§  Knowledge is founded in part through the public sphere o influence.

§  Structures are universals shared by the public sphere.

§  Particulars and contingents are used by the sciences.

·      Facts and evidence.

o   Husserl argued not against science, but that science cannot describe everything.

§  Philosophical questions are not to be confused with scientific questions.

·      The methods of science and philosophy are quite different.

o   Meaning

§  Husserl is unique in that he wants meaning to mean “what goes on in our lived experience.

·      Meaning is not tied to epistemological theory.

·      Meaning carries weight regardless of accuracy,

o   If it is part of someone’s lived experience.

§  The study of meaning.

·      How we bracket questions toward the independent existence of objects.

·      Orients the inquirer toward question of meaning,

o   As they are experienced.

·      It deals with objects outside the domain of ordinary sense.

o   Again

§  We tend to view the world through structures and language of the public sphere.

·      When we question form a position of humility of knowledge, then

o   Then we become naturally aligned toward objects as they are through our experience, rather than through preconceived notions.

o   Distinction between signs and expressions is,

§  The difference between indicating something and its being.

·      Smoke is a sign for fire,

o   But it does not express it, or stand in for it.

o   Indication is something whose presence motivates a certain belief.

o   Expression is the belief.

o   Language complicates the issue as judgment values are assigned to the statement.

§  It is through language that additional meaning is attached – with or without intent.

§  Values are assigned to the statement, and

§  Belief in the validity of the statement.

o   There are things,

§  And there is how those things are built by culture.

o   True things are true regardless of whether people believe them or not.

§  A thing is true if it is realized or discovered,

·      Not by how it is built.

o   Putting our interests first encourages questions that reorient our focus onto the thing,

§  As viewed through experience rather than assumptions of how it was built.

o   A Return

§  Separate meaning from indication.

§  Indication or inference is used with other people.

§  People’s inner thoughts only deal with meaning.

o   There is also a difference between,

§  What is meant to be said,

§  And what is spoken.

§  Meanings are distinct from the objects they infer.

§  Abstract of future objects have meaning although they may not be present.

o   Meanings are non-physical, atemporal, and ideal.

o   Sounds and marks are not meanings,

§  People have to look past them in order to understand them.

o   Every expression means something,

§  It refers to something and

§  Intimates or manifests something.

o   In summary “Bill is taller than Jim”,

§  Can be distinguished as,

·      The meaning

·      The utterance or written word

·      The speakers belief

·      The objective state - is bill really taller.

·      The conscious act that transforms sounds or marks into the conveyance of meaning.

o   Meaning is made of up of

§  How something is constructed to convey meaning, and

§  How it is fulfilled or intuited.

·      The thing that people can relate too, or grasp.

o   Ideality

§  Meanings are ideal.

·      They are atemporal.

·      They are universals.

·      They always are,

o   They don’t pass into and out of existence.

§  People favor generalizations over particulars.

§  Ref Heracletus – the world is always in flux.

·      The world is always in change,

·      But yet we don’t have to understand it all over again.

§  While objects change and pass in and out of existence,

·      Their meanings do not.

·      They remain Apriori

§  Ideal ideas don’t point to specific facts,

·      But to possible or conceivable facts.

§  Correspondence between the real and ideal is a bridge,

·      A structure shared by many.

o   Ideal objects exist:

§  Within themselves

§  They are what they regardless if they are

·      Counted, judged, though or known.

§  They become objects of knowledge in subjective lived experiences.

o   Husserl investigates how

§  “Hidden psychic experiences” are correlated into

§  “Idealities in question” in a manner that is a

§  “Determinate appropriate way” so the

§  Subject can be conscious and have knowledge of the idealities.

o   Universals

§  Objects exist in the real world as particulars.

·      They pass in and out of existence.

§  Ideas of objects are universals

·      They do not change

o   Husserl wants to reconcile how an unreal idea exists in the real world.

o   Numbers are ideals – not real.

§  However,

·      We use them and they influence us.

·      They are structures.

§  As such Husserl considers them real as objects.

·      They are self-contained objects.

§  Object – is anything upon which meaningful things can be said.

§  Idealism – the name to indicate ideals are real as objects.

o   Plato considered forms as perfect ideas of things.

§  And it was the form people drew from for understanding.

§  Husserl argues that our ability to categorize things through experience enables the formation of the universal in the first place.

§  We then encounter universals everyday, but we grasp them through eidetic intuition.

·      We reduce things to their essence and draw from universal understanding.

o   Returning to Heraclitus

§  Everything in the real world is in a state of flux

§  Nothing is genuinely repeatable.

§  So experience is not repeatable or identical to the act of perceiving it.

§  Experience is always different than the original.

o   Nature does not tell us how to divide the world

§  Distinctions are made by a form of selective focus.

§  Sameness can only be recognized through universal structures that are built with the observer.

o   Truths are things that stay the same regardless of what people think.

§  They are realized through discovery.

§  Things that are constructed, or built-up, are not true.

o   We build our world through cultural structures,

§  And we tend to interpret and live our lives through these structures.

o   Pure logical Grammar.

§  How can meanings be combined to form new meanings.

§  The laws of grammar are apriori and regulate language.

·      As such they impose barriers and constraints to meaningful thought.

o   Intentionality Again

§  It is only be being conscious of something that we can know it.

§  Husserl views consciousness

·      Not as a thing

·      But as an intentional relation toward transcendental objects.

§  Refers to and is key to

·      The relationships

o   Between the subjectivity of knowledge, and

o   Objectivity of the content known.

§  There is an object directness about conscious acts

·      Our emotions are directed and caused by objects.

·      A feature of all conscious acts.

§  It is a self-transcending event

·      It takes us away from ourselves and places focus on something else.

o   People experience objects through consciousness

§  Even if the objects are not present or not real.

§  An object is whatever is aimed at by an intentional act.

§  We are engaged with a world of objects.

o   However, we then to see and think in terms of objects rather than sensory input.

o   We distinguish between a collection of perceptions as “an object”

§  And we assign all kinds of values.

o   Our way of seeing is foreground/background,

§  But that is not how the world organizes itself.

o   Our normal world’s selective focus

§  Frame environments are viewed as one object that needs interpretation of the elements within it.

o   Essential Distinctions

§  Intentionality is

·      The conscious act of awareness toward

·      The semantic context or meaning of

·      An object.

§  Objects are distinguished between

·      Their “matter” of the act

o   The object

·      The “Quality” of the act

o   The interpretation.

§  One object can yield different content.

·      A clear distinction can be made between the object and its content.

§  Consciousness is not only in grasping an object,

·      But how it grasps it.

·      ***Our attitudes affect how we grasps an object, and to what end***

o   It affects how we view the object,

o   And how we interpret it.

·      Quality and matter are moments, but not the whole part.

o   Knowledge

§  Meaning in no way resides in the world of objects.

§  It must emerge from acts of consciousness.

§  It is not identical or reducible to what we perceive.

·      One perception can give rise to multiple meanings.

·      The same meaning can be found in different perceptions.

§  Meaning can be conveyed as an utterance

·      Without the receiver having to experience it.

·      Meaning is conveyed without the perception.

o   But still relies on the perception of the receiver.

o   Evidence

§  The experience between meaning and what is itself presented.

§  Between sense of an assertion and

·      The self-given state of affairs.

§  Objectifying acts are either

·      Intentional (Rational) or

·      Intuitive (Empirical).

§  Language is signitive

·      Empty in itself.

·      We have to look through it to get meaning.

§  Seeing is intuitive

·      Fulfilled through experience.

§  We can only understand a meanings intent if

·      Only if we know how to verify it.

·      Unreal or impossible objects are understood in the same manner.

o   Because we can verify their non-existence.

·      Unreal things cannot be shown.

§  Evidence is not be confused with

·      Belief of conviction.

·      It’s public, and it’s fallible.

·      It should reside closely with the state of affairs.

·      Correction should be made through stronger evidence.

§  One can intuit something without knowing something.

·      Because one lacks the language that will arrive later.

·      Our selective focus may be “set” from a different angle.

§  A picture might to some degree affect meaning fulfillment,

·      But no where near the strength of the encounter.

§  Most things are presented with

·      Incomplete information

·      Our minds have to fulfill the rest.

§  Perceptual evidence is never adequate.

·      It is incomplete.

o   Non-objects are still real because their non-being is still conceivable.

§  Perceptual evidence can only go as far as the senses.

·      Different modes of evidence are needed for different subjects.

·      Different evidentiary            standards for different domains.

·      Perceptual evidence cannot yield what is attainable though math and logic.

§  *** The Dream

·      Questions tend to seek answers,

o   To seek objects of understanding.

o   The question directs the seeking and frames the nature of the answer.

·      The insight-

o   How do you recall memory from the standpoint of meaning.

o   One can ask a question to get “apple” as an answer.

§  But how to frame a question to recall the apple based in our usage

·      Something to eat, to small, to feed, etc.

·      The Point

o   How do you stimulate the idea of philosophy from a point of need or recall,

§  Rather than as ideas to be learned.

o   How do you photography to stimulate a personal reference or subject.

§  Profiles

·      We only see objects from one side.

o   Yet they give us the experience of all sides.

o   We see the object as a whole.

§  Sublime: When we are unable to see the objects as a whole.

·      How do we conceal what the mind fills in.

§  Space and freedom.

·      We add profiles as we move about an object.

o   Affirms its existence.

·      Upon reflection

o   It seems absurd to perceive something in its entirety or without perspective.

·      Enough of an object presents itself

o   To rule out other possibilities.

o   By may promote more possibilities.

·      We expect what is unseen to correlate with our expectations.

§  Differences from empiricists

·      We see beyond the object

o   Something is immediately perceived as an object

§  Rather than just the datum.

·      Relativisms tends to view things from the whole – or a closed system,

o   Rather than something as part of a larger whole.

§  Intuition Again

·      Intuition is

o   Looking into something first hand

o   It is achieved by perception and intellecting.

§  An insight into its essence

§  We can grasp abstract ideas

§  As such

·      Numbers, language, and other structures can be viewed as objects.

§  Genuine insights cannot conflict.

·      However, they can change over time.

§  Observations are only effective when

·      They are motivated by the desire to answer definite questions,

o   Or to test theories.

§  Observations are informative when speaking in favor or opposition of theory.

§  New ideas tend to become

·      New systems and dogma.

·      Has the tendency to become built, and thus

·      Obscuring further exploration.

§  We tend to see something and

·      Attach linguistic markers

·      Over time the markers are all that’s left

·      And the richness of experience is lost.

§  The intuitive is replaced by the technical

·      The intuitive becomes a system of rules.

§  We tend to get lost in the world of symbols, words and concepts, in their substitution of experience.

·      We focus on manipulating the technical.

o   We lose grasp experience

§  The following is considered “common sense”

·      History, Philosophy, Culture

·      Language, Math, Logic

·      Theoretical Speculation

o   But they are all systems of thought.

§  The way to move away from authority,

·      Is to move away from systems of thoughts, and

o   Their personal expectations

Ø  Middle Husserl

o   Issues with Time

§  Not in ordinary linear sense.

§  But in terms of experience.

·      We may be in the now, but

·      We’re constantly thinking about the future, and

·      Reflecting on the past.

§  We transition between the two modes.

o   The present is always in relation to the past and the future,

§  They are always a part of the present’s horizon.

o   Primal Presentation

§  Attention is given to what is occurring at any given time.

§  Retention – What we just experienced.

§  Protention – unreflective anticipation of what may be about to happen.

o   Horizon of anticipation – Protention.

o   Pereception is temporal

§  We perceive things through successive moments in time.

§  While expecting to see something occur next.

o   Phenomenology – A science of essence.

§  Not one of matters of fact.

o   Symbols aren’t interpreted through time,

§  They stand alone.

§  Experience is the perceiving of events through time.

o   People experience ordinary things

§  Through special insight or training,

§  And through structures.

·      We perceive things through generalities more so than specifics.

·      Universals over particulars.

o   We have to grasp new ideas in a way that they can be understood.

§  We use eidetic reduction to grasp experience.

§  Using universals to understand particulars.

o   Perceiving is close to people.

§  No strange method is needed for people to grasp ideas.

§  However, content meaning moves to universals and symbols.

§  Experience is grasped intuitively, seamlessly and invisibly.

o   Insights may require multiple experiences over time.

§  However, another theory, is that insights may exist as a must.

§  It’s not so much they are derived, as

·      They are reflections of what must be.

·      2+2=4 works because 2+2=4 is the way it exists,

o   and how it is understood.

§  Things exist as they must exist.

·      We normalize, rationalize and interpret the world to our way of thinking and understanding.

·      But our way of thinking does not necessary reveal the essence of how a thing is.

o   Eidetic reduction is reducing things to their attributes and to their utility – both of which tend to be universals.

§  How they relate to other objects.

§  We do not necessarily experience the world through subjects, but by their attributes.

o   There is a blur between universals and particulars.

§  We can interpret things because of universals and then apply them to particulars.

§  Universals are a framework of understanding.

o   A priori, eidetic reduction, and essence are the same things.

§  They are axiomatic experiences – They are what they are because they must be so.

o   Differing cultures have differing rules,

§  But for the same reason.

§  U.S. drives on right, but others drive on left.

·      The reason why they designate a driving lane is the same.

o   We refer to particulars through universals.

o   Husserl suggests.

§  The consciousness is always concerned with meaning.

·      Not raw data.

§  We see a house or car,

·      But the house is seen as the “house from the front” rather than

o   “The front of a house”

·      We do not go into the front of a house.

·      We go in a house.

§  We see front, but it has little meaning in context with the house.

o   Eidetic inquiry does not presuppose

§  The existence of anything.

§  Truth, or

§  Matters of fact.

§  Imaginative intuitions can seize upon eidetic inquiry,

·      And the essence of things.

§  Anything that presents the principle to inspection engages eidetic inquiry.

·      And the imagination seems quite good at it.

·      It is as good as sense perception, but

·      It can be sued freely to examine the boundaries of the principles.

o   For Husserl

§  Philosophy is conceptual and focuses on A Priori truths, rather

§  Than contingent truths of science.

o   Critique of Empiricism

§  Empricisms assumes all experience of nature is based in sensory experience,

·      It only discloses particulars.

·      And never universals.

o   Principles, qualities or structures.

o   There is a chasm between how we experience life, and

§  How we view isolated variables with narrow focuses.

§  Of course there will be skepticism.

o   Principle of all principels.

§  Intuition – Awareness of something specific,

·      To grasp or to take.

·      To intuit is how we focus on seeing,

o   Because how we see affects content of meaning.

o   Natural Attitude – “Common Sense” – Beliefs we adopt habitually and without critical thinking.

§  An obstacle to the study of the lived experience.

·      We don’t view it as experience, but

o   Tend to look past it

o   We take it to be telling us.

o   We bias toward causal relationships

·      Promotes and metaphysical approach

o   Objects are real,

o   But their relationships, their principles’ and essence, are subjective.

o   A view of belief set in prior experience.

·      We use this mode of belief

o   That is uncritical

o   To rationalize and explain what is given to experience.

o   Phenomenological reduction

§  The purpose of suspending existing judgments is not to suspend belief,

·      But focus our approach in a different manner.

·      To remove things the obscure or distance our interpretations.

o   Common sense approach uses a

§  “crude” objective/subjective scale.

§  We tend to focus experiences as something happening to an object.

·      And we subjectively focus on the cause.

·      The event moves from the object to the cause.

o   A distortion of the object

o   Creates the illusion the objects are acted upon by external forces.

o   We view time and space as objects rather than

§  Structures of spatial and temporal experience.

§  We view aesthetic and ethical values as subjective,

·      And project them onto us from a world that does not contain them.

o   The point is to find our assumptions about the world,

§  So we can bracket them out from influencing experiences.

§  Finding what we do not normally see,

·      To remove biases.

o   Husserl’s Point

§  We don’t perceive an object as a primary, or

§  Object of experience, but as the abstraction of our many encounters of an object.

§  A rock is a rock, but we perceive it in its use.

·      For skipping, as a weapon, as a tool of decoration.

o   Objects constitute meaning relative to their surroundings,

§  Objects take on new meaning when placed in new environments.

o   Horizon

§  We have a sense of background when viewing an object.

·      A dim awareness

o   A sense of background and anticipation.

o   Horizon – Internal

§  That part of an object that is not visible,

·      But we intuit.

o   Horizon – External

§  We perceive figure on background.

·      The unfocused background

·      It is partly responsible for how we constitute the objects.

§  The same applies to whatever we focus on.

·      We may ponder an idea,

o   But it is surrounded by social structures, problems and related ideas.

o   Thought takes place in a certain intellectual context, most

§  f which is not focused most of the time.

o   In all perception there is figure and ground.

§  However, we tend to focus on figure without much consideration of ground.

§  There is usually more information than what we are generally aware.

o   Idealism

§  People argue that Husserl’s approach means everything is internally constructed.

§  If so, then the world would be fully transparent,

·      Yet there is still mystery and hidden aspects.

§  Husserl emphasizes that meaning is form by consciousness and experience.

·      As we do not have complete experience of everything, then there is not complete visibility.

Ø  Late Husserl

o   Husserl becomes interested with a “Genetic” Approach to to phenomenology.

§  Origins of language

·      As language is not neutral and the it is the culmination of history, tradition and culture.

o   There is social meaning,

§  But there is also personal.

·      People encounter and learn and their lives become enriched.

§  However, Historical forces become the bedrock of assumptions,

·      And they become obstacles for clear seeing.

o   Husserl lived the late 1930s in Germany,

§  During the rise and achievements of science,

·      But regression and barbarism of politics.

§  Husserl believed the realm of science became disjointed with the human experience.

·      Science evolved, but became removed from ethics.

·      Science advances knowledge,

o   But not in terms of meaning or human significance.

o   Today science advances knowledge in terms of profit, but not what is necessarily best for humanity.

o   It estranges us from rational thought and or reason.

o   Husserl wanted to create a system of experience that generates

§  Insight – truth – and universals, but not

§  Unfounded opinion, traditions or prejudices.

§  The highest function of man is become autonomous.

·      Personal autonomy of thought becomes the guiding force.

o   Science is worthless without humanity

§  Husserl blamed contemporary failure of rationalism due to the idea that

·      Rationalism must be understood in the terms of scientific naturalism.

§  The Life World

·      World of pre-scientific experience

·      Before philosophizing

·      The world is primary,

o   And tech and science are derivatives of it.

·      We confuse and give value to the derivative, and reject the primary as a construct.

o   It is in the life world that meaning and values exist.

o   Life world is near invisible because it is closest to us.

§  But it is the only real world.

§  Ignoring it leads to distortions.

§  Because we reject the most evident if it does not align with a particular interpretation.

o   Life World – Immediate lived experience,

§  And yet the sciences are held high as the best descriptors of reality.

§  One cannot construct the scientific without the life world, but

·      The life world can easily exist without science.

§  We confuse true being with a method, with a construct.

·      Applies to tradition, politics, identity, religion, etc.

o   Genetic Phenomenology

§  The study of the development of structures over time.

§  What we see depends on

·      How we see it, and that depends on past experience.

§  Passive synthesis

·      When we think about something and form judgments about it.

·      Experience builds on itself.