McMaster University DigitalCommons@McMaster Open Access Dissertations and Theses Open Dissertations and Theses 1-1-1976 The question of Phenomenological Immanence David William Jardine Recommended Citation Jardine, David William, "The question of Phenomenological Immanence" (1976). Open Access Dissertations and Theses. Paper 4567. http://digitalcommons.mcmaster.ca/opendissertations/4567 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Open Dissertations and Theses at DigitalCommons@McMaster. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Access Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@McMaster. For more information, please contact scom@mcmaster.ca. DAVID .Jｾ｛ｩｮｄｐ ｬ B .. IL A 'i'hesls in Partj.al Fulfilmont of the RcquircxantR hcHA.31lER UN IVEHJ I'ty HAY 19'76 i1" McMASTER UNIVERSITY (1976) MASTErt OF ARTS Hamilton, Ontario (Ph:Llosophy) TITId.!.i: Th8 Question Phenomenological Immanence 0 81TPBRVISOH: Dr" G ｾ B. Hat ison ｎｕｈｂｲｾｒ OF PAGES: x, 181 SCOPE AHD CONT gPTS: 'I'his )4,J8S1s dEwls ,..,itl, tl G phenomeDolo5;Y of F.dmund eY-posit.ion of Husserlinri Hi.w.')l:;rl u As 1s demandp.d of ｡ＩＧｾｹ phGnome.nology ｾ \HJ ha.ve character ｩＺｾ･､ phenomena logy 8.3 the . quest for a ｲｩｾｯｵｳ Science of Being. We have pushed this ｯｮｾｪ step l'nrthel' ｆｬＮｲｾ､ attempted to !')hm,j ho'.'I1, for HuesGrl, a rigorous Science of ｂ･ｩｮｾ must be characterized as a el:d J os prJ\. of ｉｾＧｩｬ ＾［｛ｾｮ｣ ･ＨＭ｝＼ ｜ＧｨｾＺ h;l.ve <)':otcmptrd to shu';] haiti the .... • .. 1 ｦｾｴｕｬＧｅｊ .. ｾＧﾷｊＬＮＮＬ _ i •• ｟ Ｇ ｟ ｾ .... _ ｟ ... ｾ _ _ ,"_.. ｝ｊＨｪｾﾷ［ＮｩＩＺｌｴ ｔｴｾＩ ｾ , ..1'\ｬＢｾｊ 0 _J{-:J_ . ｲｊ［ＺＮｾｬ Ｌ ｡ ｣ｽｪ :1(.1': ;.., Co ',1' .- ri......') C' ...... ｊ ｾ ｌ､ｾｦ ·1, VI.h.. ｊＮＬJｾ ""1"(;;t.l'.\.d (.. '"" t,; ｃｎｅｾＩ \'J6 rj,!:;.;/!- ｄＮｬ ｾＭ［ｏ 1JheJI()tT'.f":Ill)l:.)!;tca:L ｉｭｲｾｪｩＺＭ Ｎｲ ｾｷＧＳ･ 0 ...f' "":J .; ,?..,.l-: ",. <# '(' .·./..h.. ·.!.,.lC.).U sh,J'..m } G r'jr?orous ｅＺ［｣ｴ･ｬｾ｣･ . '1".. '"f' " ", ,.,'J J-" ;'. . JC) ...ITl.J!j .. ｾ l):e £; of tbe the att.aj..ｴｾ｜ＮＸＱＡ［ｮ \)i') of y \' r1ｉｾｊ JJ1 A!')mJ. ,<1';) LJ ... \ 0 ｾｾ J ｳｰｬｾｩ･ｬＮｾ｣ of .':'ccull'os a snocial mcthc·jol cw"i.c.:'J. Ｎｾ r> <:-. OJ ,.. '.' .!- 0 .; i.J.<1 .;"v ... ..}","1 ＬｽＮｾ ·t't"'(·...... "-',;'./). ·te>..... r.... J"l \.1 iF!) ()-l '·v.l 1· r. t..i v L. ':. Ｂ｣ｾ v __ＬｾＭＧt \. -:t'll-l:','C' Ｂｬｲ［ｾ ＧＷＢ ＧｾＮｊ Eo! [t t:t Ｑｾ ｴ (' rrL i.e [: (;(1 c ＡＺ［ｾＬ t.:-: ｾＭＨ 1 ｮＱＰ［ｾ 1.} Ing 0 f 111] l?flOnJen!) log y r ｅｾ niB. :1,J:).S i ｾＨＧ｜ ...... r ｾＡＧｩＺ｜ﾷ ｾﾷＷｐＢＺ r'\" ｩｾＢＧＩ ＱＧＮＺｾ "''lie? ＢＬ｜ＧｾＮ ｲｴＢＧｉｾ ,"\"1' -""l'" ,.1Ｌ｟Ｎｾ "', h• '_'-" ,; Ａｾ U Ｌｾ • ,_ i' _ Ｎｾ Ｂｊ \ i ' l. lJ' .J ,. kLC :.l ,_ ,':•.t .i. .. , ':' O. l· n e ｾＡＺＮｴＱＧＬ ＧｾＨｬＢｉｓ ＮＺｓｾＢＧＩ r-) )-·":kl-0'"':''''1r''c (t'hP. . ) i L': ·t'lEa·'I1.r,ｾ .ＩＧＭｉ Ｂｬｾl., c.• \ "C' S:.. •.. _y_,:_. ｾＮ Ｚ Ａ ｟ ...Ｎｾ｟ＢＭＺｯＮｾＬＢＺｊ Ｍ ＬＢＮｾ ［ .' ＧＩ1·ｲｬＧＺﾷＭＩｾＢｬＭｯＴＱＧ ｬﾷＨｴ Lll ｬｩＮｉｾ J • t) ........ ｴｾ ..) "1'"' :tJ. a>..; t 110 1118. t t r.: r or nn 0.nOt,\c.:no 1 O=' 'V. (t.L..ＮｬｋＧｊｃｓｬｴＺｾ i?:llta 1 S ul'J:1 C ｣ｴﾷｾ ·tJf"l--t·-;:':-,Ｍ［ﾷＧ Ｍｬﾷ［ｯｴＭﾷｉＺ｟ｾ［ Ｇｾ ＡＬＮ ＭＧvt .. "'J t.:l 'h u f> -, a ai' I· e'r '0;' e."! '0' ｾｬＧｽＢＡ I"': I' .! '''' '.1 1 01'11' ' \ ) tv .... r> t... ｜ｾ ... ｾ ...."" ...... ｾ ,.I ..} . . _........ .,1 j .... ... 'j J ........ ... '.JL\ J '-, J> . • J.. cJ rOl f:l "'J ,,'v.l lJ .. J ,.·1 t <:<... 1.1 I'J .; "'- '0,.· ｾＮＨ ｾＨ Y"\ ... ［ＺＢｾｊＩ l ........' ... " _J..· s J,.; ).) -! 1:...'" H. 'n 1"' (.•";>'.to, ｾＨ :. :-''''','" AｾＧｯｊ .. ｾ 1_ (. :}'''C'' 1 ... ) ·1:.)·!wl ,,!_ . . . . \J V .L.... h l.., I Q 1 A (''·('/ ,r.. ..., ... • -;.... ..I. ｾＩ '"' .... J '! I. '-/_t;t C_ｲＧｾ I \.t \, \.1 V .J f' .'L Ｎ｜ｾ l.SＮＧＱｾ v.f 1 r.)｜ＮＺＬｾ I;. have att Anptod to '{ive an <'" .. \ I ｾＢ .. \'1 .l_, 11;r) 'c' ." 0 C' 1UJ.],.' 0 C"J. fl 1.,,)._, \ "'lot. \-JJ.t.t) j:'e:::ard to the Ji1ntts:c ｾ ｾＨﾷＮｩ ･ＮｴＺｲ ｬｹｴＱＮｻｾ :J.;:; 'l;!ell ｾＬｓ s;Tr,'Cnetle OCSCt?:i.:9tjr\1l of the f:L8'Ld of pl) :.F'JOwe lit) 1 ｯｾ［ ::Lc;-j 1 :r m1'!i'J.ri81l.C e (en Ii PT ｻｾｇ 'l'HH ＩｾＺＬ ｾ ［ｾｮｏ I! CJ' i'L 5. C: H1. ("""1" ..... _ ｾＮＢ '0')1'.. Ｑｾ -...:...ｾ Ii .:) .:.ｾＬ c,·•. t •HPI d' c· to ....., ｏｉＱｾＮ 't,JU; J"Jt "J:;-' ......... t ＬｾＮｊ ＡＢｾＧＮ .<4,.._, (' II'....S 't" , J' O· ......... "'1(.,;'14 g n1.1 .......... D" lin'l'll' c: ..Lｾ t.·;...;.. (Ii'• .:: .1_ (.> . .S .. ' _ ...' '-., _,""" 11; th,:: BlJss0rlo ｾＧｨｃｬ ｵｮＸ｛ｬＬｲﾷｴｨＺｌｮｾ of eff!'}cts Hut-sorI.' s j.rd t:i [-d. e q 1:.:>. t '/1:1.. ｾＧ I) a 1':i '; 01' 0 ｵｾ［ 3c]. -3 no Ｈｾ ':1 c ho v (:; ｾＮｩＧＨｬ Ｉ Ｂ ﾷ .... -}Wl . . ··, ...Ｎｾ｟ ＢＡＮＧﾷｲｩ Ｎ｜Ｍ ＬＮ ｾｬ I '" 1,.), ....".!t "I ＧＺｴＨＮｉＬｽＩＢＱｌｾﾷｃ ..... ' .. AJ·':) ｾﾷＱｬｦＮ ｵｾ ｾ｜ＧＢ ｌＧｾｉＢＬＧＮＬ n,,,·..ＢＭＧＺ［ｌｦｾ .> Ｎ｟ ｶｵﾷＮＬｾ ｟ＩＺＬ ,J-'_U, t::C't"' ｾ lJt t, ･ｲＡｊＮＨＺ ｊ＼ｧ･ｮｾ ｴＳ oJ:' 'chLs eLccl':1, ?rd tbe Cf'l>:J'.:'t of thL" ci.r'cl?1 on 1)/"{<;:"-J;';;"K,';':;"v i (, ｳＸ｝ｲｾﾷＡｲｪｴｇｬﾷｮｩＢＧ ..... tpi·1.·on ',ic f'inl'i .... ﾷｴＧｬ Ｚ ｝ｾＨ ｾ､ ｴ ('1.'·... ("13 ;:;c;. J• .,,_. ､ｯｲＧＱＬＺ ｮｾＱＳ i;b<,J ｾＺＮ ＬＧｙｾＩＬｬＺ｣ｮＱＧｲｭｯｮＮＺＭｨｰ in i T,S ovm s(d f'n tnt!? rpr e ta. t ton ｾ be ｃｨｩＭＮｬＢＧＩｾ .. Ci':t;"';8j as a r,hi1.030]ll:y ,jf Im'·Ia.np.ncGo Yet t,hf-J ］ｬ｡ｾＨｔ ･ｲＮ ｴ｢Ｚｩｾ［ :)'!",Jt!(iiUC'1101.'-J;:'Y of ｲｾＺｬ Ｇｴｭ｣Ｎ ｰＮｲｾ ＺＧ ＩＮ ｐＨＩＸｊＮｴﾷｪ un d0('. ｹｬｴＨｾ｜ＮｩＧ j OJ1 n!: r)j .:" n()i::'E' no 1 r. ｾＧｙ .L "' . . . . . . ｾ iog of ... J, ｴｾｩｳ ,I' t ,l.lJj V," • '").# ｾＬＣ ... circlq IrL11i1clneCCG" lIfe fCJund. t, l t8. t ＺＮ｝ＬｄＢＧｾｔｪｊＡ __ , ...... .. Ｓｾｏ ｓ ｴｾﾷ｟ｾＧＢ 1S ,.Jv .... • ｊｾ ｾ Ｎ ｾｲ .....ｾｪﾷＮＱ ,It that it cannot be a the.n 1,os .... 6. the qUI?st j.0!') of -r e quir ed i.1r,;o,:.'c n.;tUl'0 rGlJl3.irwd a ｪＺｬｹｳｴｾｮＧＢ .\-J..to. 8. .... J ...... _ ,r .. ｰｨｩｬｯｳｾｹ of ＨＱＧＺｴＮＧｄｮｓＬｾ･ｻｬ ＢｉＮｑｮｏ･Ｂ transi'orml3. tiotl -Jut Of' ·dlOUght OF ｔａｂｌｾ Ｐｔｎｅｾｋｏ［ 6 ｉｬＩｴＯＧｏＺＭｾｃ l iOIlo to c • 6 t. 13 IP. e t 9 (I. •• ( .. •••• ｾ ｾ (\ .. fl 0 a .... tl t> •• CI • C! ... .. " flo Trle ｬｾ［ＭｩＮｴｵｲ･ of :.1 ｓＱｬＣｃＧｌｏｾＺｩ 3ci.::::nce elf ｾＳ ｪＮｲｊｆ［･ The p·:);):::.ibU :;.ty of 2. ',lif-;Ore 1J,3 3ci<;n::;: of Tll8 T/ecc2si"Y' of (1 ｳＮＱｾｯｲＬ｣ｩ｜Ｉ >J ｾＨＮｲＩ ［ｾ o.t:: Ｎｯｾ Ｚｲｩ［ＮＲﾷ Fh .t 10 [3 0 fJ 1-: ｩｾ 0 r I ｲ［ｬｾＩ :;}.i e (.! c: e « e ｾ ｾ s: • c 0' In t r () J ll2. ': i ThB ｾ 1') :'):: 1 Ct t:,1 r ｾＭＺ 1. ti t ｩＧＭＺ［ｾ｝｣ｬﾷ Ｎ ｛ＢＧＵＭｅｉｊＡ ｾｲｻｬＺＮ 0 I"; ｾ (! v 'G 0 I ｉｾｴｮ｝ＮＺ (Jf '1: i J, ＮＡｾｵ ｾＨ 0 ｦＬｲＮＭｾｪ i ［ｾＺＯＮ 0 e 4} _ • 0 i:r:: r, c Ｈｾ (- 'I' ｾ • ｾ f " .,., .. ., Co " " o;c " ..... • .. c • Of ｾ (" ｾ '" .,. (' .. : _ :: f' ｾ ｾ ｾ • (I .. 4\' G If • 6 (, ｾ ｾ .;; • • ｲＧｾＩ «I '" • ') , ｾ ｾ ,L - pp. G .. ...:J • pp" CI ｾ ｾ iJ ｾ ＬＮｾ :02).110_ c: riC ｹＺｾ . .ｾ ＬＺ Ｘｦｾｩ｣Ｚｴｲｾ｛ｮｩＧ ｩｴＱＺｺｬｲ＿ＧｴｾＺ｜ＱＲ ｮＧｾ (;0 II ..... 0 * . . (' :: r"' ·?tIl sc Ｈｾｮｊ ｒｊＮｪｾＱ Lc·f;i . ＺＮＳｾ o:Lo ｬ｡ｾＮﾷｩ［ 0 1:) (\ 0: i e '!II 0 Cl .c ｾＩｰ it: t"bo t: ｾ ｾＭ <C •• t ｾ 0 teo'" c '" .. • I)!) y.:r.n • (0 Ｑ［ ｃｪｬＧＱＨ ｾＯ ...)rJ of' pp. l);.J \) !='1-:' ｾ ｾ Ｚ｣ｲｴｊＢｾｉ l\·t .:. t ｾｌＨ［ｲＬ r:,r .,-\i i Ct I,(; ｬｾ It f Ｓｾ ｊＺ ＧｾＮ f", t c C (. t (' 1> " ｾ 4: 0 ｬｾ I:t lI" .. r"'- t· Il c:. 0 " f 4 .. ti • ｾﾷｬ ＢＬｾｴＺＴ r ' ) --, "') C:? j ':J_\ .. .. .. \. .. Co .. .. ('I to., f" \of (. ). ｾ \ ｾＮ 11 ｾ (, t ｾ (> II , (l .... :l ｾ (10 1:; ｾ ｾ to • ｾＮ ., iJ' e ｾ t. ll' ", !\ ;" 01 « t>- t ,. b ｲﾷｾ［ｇ ＺｾＬＮｲＱｦｽｮＬＮ ＬｬｲＧﾷＺＮｾ ＮＡＱ ｜ＸＮＱｵＭﾷ GIl " ｾ " • ｾ (" \" 1T::; ｾ ｾ Ｚ［ t": ｾ •.' ＺｾＮ i.n tt ('. fJ ｾＬ '2 r' C I.j ｾＺＮ ..ｾＺ . I'd 1 Ｏ｜Ｎ［ｾＱＭＺｊｹｴｌﾷ 1 (.;r.-. ic . . l ｾ 'J C ., ［ﾷｩＮｾＸＬｬＴ j ｜Ｎｩ［ｾＺＭ r)l1)' ;7'.(;:.:: .. b $ III " 0 f t> t>. Ik to- .4 .,. ｾ［ｬｏ Ｌ Ｇ ＺＭ of f' __ＺＡＨｲｾﾷ Ｚｷｪｲ ＬＮ［ﾷｾｉ ＭＺ ＨｪＮ［ Ｇ ﾷ Ｚｲ ｾｉ［ＬＨｲ ＮＧＺｾ［ 1 P. ｉｾｦ＿ＢＱ ＬＧＭｩ ｾﾷｃ () ｾ If ｲＭｩＺ｟ﾷｾｴｬ｜｣ ＿ｴＺＬＭＧ ｉｾｊ ();" I r! t. r ()..ｾ｟ ｾＬＧ e t i Vo I":'! , ::.<:":Jj ｪｾｲｰ },- 1-: e 1') ･ｩＢｌｾ Ｚ ｬｾ［ＮｩＧ ｽ ＨｬｾＭ ,. • 6 1,"-' i"1 I: (- (J '" f !o ｴＮ［Ｇｪｾ ;-! " 0. !- I) ｾ ;) • , .. ;) C> .. or,; & 1. ｾ • ｓｪｲＮ｣ｾｴＩｬｩＷＮＧ［＼ｳ･Ｉｾ r).1 l or 11.', or. 1'1 .. C.') '1-,/ .... _""'" J.. ' : . ) (, f't • eo ｾ 'fe,sl: :J.f' :-L(':.flscb.on" ｣ｩｴＱ Ａｾ＾Ｎ ＩＬＺｊ 1"10 1 0 ｩＺｾ ., :·";:::.r;L'f; .. '; 't J ｬｾｲ｣ＧＡＷｮｊﾭ ()f ｴＮＺＭ ｦｾ c· .J. " ｾＺ Ｎ ＢＧ lwrHil.1fl0Il."If.:;B ｾ｟ l' ... 0""" 1-(1i'.i'-·11 ｯｾ 10P:_Z(Jfl ＡＮＧ･ｮＨＩ［Ｚ｜ｰｾＱ｣ﾷＬ｟｛Ｂｌ ｾｬｩｴ ＨﾷＺｲ ｾｃ :11 I'-::! .:Jc".Ln5.t.i(,r.:, '·Ji',:r" ｪｾＱ ｴＧｾ ＺＭｴｲ｛［Ｎ Ｚ ｃＮ Ｚ＿ｬ ＨＱｾＢＩｊＡｃＶ ｍＩｾ t' :.::"'1 J: 1. Cj:. ,': D ｾ｜Ｎ＾ r ... . to (> Ｔｄｾ Ｉｾｦｉ ,. ].. ｾｃｬ l:P.· ｊＮｬ｟［ｾﾷ 11!-v . ｣ＺｾｬｌＮﾷ ｴＮ ｾＱ ｡ fi f,. •• e _ ｾ .. J ,. Q ｾ ｾ ｾ PI:' " 1. J 9--13 ('5 11 l\.cti'vit;/ ｯＮｲＡｾｊ ＿ｾｩＳｓｩｶ ｴｹｾ A ::::rd;hctic Description of ｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｩｮ｡ｬ 0.0 V 0 •• ｾ ｾＮ 00 0 0 1)1) t, 1. ,)"'3 -1'+ ., 10.• heno- :·'ield of Ulr-J II ｉｭｑ｡ｮｾ ｣･ IntrCQLlctiono e &""" •• e., S'. e e.o 7i2\') of t ,e ｅｾｯ in the Lc::..:::.1'2:11 (l ｈｵｾＭＺＮｳＢＳｲｬ T11 \.7 ｾ ..?':.!,B ｾ fin ａＮｊｾＩＳＮｪ ＧＨＡｲ､Ｌ ｏ｟ｬＺｾ !j ｾＮ u ｾ l.> 4 (; $;t & " G' ., to iii' • • • ,. 0 f ｾ _10\'1 ＧｔＱｾｯ "t ［ｾＧ '3 ｾ i r:; 1 n Ｚｅｾ .L:SC':'t}'JS () ｾ ｾ 'I he 1 ｂｾ［ ＺｄｾｬＩｲＮ＿ e- & l> f- (.: tl e (f. It IJ • .. ｉＧｾ･Ｒ､ J,h:: & & G e • 0 11' #1 0 • •• 0 ••• " • •.•.••..•••• ＺＮＱＨｾ､ e: 0 0 " (l (' 0 ., 0 <$ 0 ｾ e • ... , (J .. . .0'. is;::; ｦｾｬＮ )-'} ｾ I! ｾ ｾ t' or; ｳｊＯｾＨＩＺ｟ｽ［ ＮｲｾＡｬﾻｃｩ｛｣Ｚｾ＿ｊ t' f) ｾ 0 q ｾ t , 0' ｾ 0 " Go C pp. ltfL l PI' • 1!-tl-l i2. pp. 11.:3. pp" 1L! )'1 -14 -3 • ｾ the Impossibi- ｾｾ ';Si'foc't ();'"' tl;e ＧｾｪＮｲ ｬｾＭＺＧ 1.f- I I" .\. (-' l' Pl.' ＮＸ［ＱｾＨ t 1. on • ｾＡＧｴ［Ｚ • in r a. rJ"':; c cn'i e r.l. :: 9 In ;l'o,luction The ｣ｾ･ｬｲｩｃ •• 4 t ｊ｣ｬｲＭＳｋｰｬｩ｣ｾｴｩｯｮ Infinitr: '7'2105 1 it 'y"l' ., ＭＧＺｯｮ｛ＧｾＮｉＧｭＳｾｩｯｮ as ｾｨ･ｮｯｭｬｹ ｃ［ｯｮ｣ｬＡＩｳｩＮｯｮｾ f). 6 pp. lL!8-150. I'::J • < ell' « " . .. , ( ｾ ｾ 4 : i ｾｩＱ '" -,"''''; -: ])1) ｾ \jP ｾ :-'f' b PREFACE We have found it necessary to preface this ｴｨ･ｳｩｾ "Jith a 1'e\·] comments "'hieh will hopefully help to orlent the. readGr to its general formatQ of dIl, it needs to be noted that i.::he 1:!orli; ｆｬＩｾｳｴ Ｎｴｯｽｬｏ｜ｶｾ pJ:esented he:rB does not so to speak, tb6 liclC'":..:,';:LcaJ stylE.!H of vn:lting a thesis., ｉＧｾｯﾥＮ［ｨ･ＺｴＧｅｩ in the body' t...f' th:i..s ·'.lx: ,- sls are cr:l.tical corlElents of vax'ions cOlfJmentatol's on rrd.,scd and 111'1:5,8, of cour so? is not to say tba t ＸＮｮｾ ﾷＮｬ･ｊＧ ､ the cent:t:al purposo of iODS ＧＮｾ Good comrrer·t:',l·y ts to lead OXla of thought$ We faol, OJ[ cno logy ｈｾｬｳ Ｇｾｲｬ t.hat !! C 0* ｴＮＺｳｬＭＡｊＧｾ 'Y"l1 (11'\.. .', l, "\' ｾＮ 11 :':'1 1';. of J<):1mUl"id that \)(;, !!la./, b::.' tl·::cused of' te lting the 01 p03i te eyt:('Olile 01' tElnd.o1'lcy notGcl <:1 bove ｾ Be that as 1 t may, the t.10cond31? v' ｾＮｴ ＢＬｩＧ ｾﾷ［ｬＺＸｭ Hu.sser1. a;:'e listed in our BIBLIOJR.l\PlfY .. 'fhe sale cxc0ption (v) vi" to this proceedure in our thesis is Eugen Fink's brilliant arti.cIe entitled tiThe Phonomenologic:al Philosophy of Edmund Husserl. and Contemporary C.'lticism fl , vlhich we have 8xplici.tly cited several times. ThiS, vIe feel, merely affirms the unique character of this ｓＨｾ｣ｯｮ､ｬｹＬ ｡ｲｴｩ｣ｬ･ｾ because of' the fa.ct that thL thosis represents an ongoing development of th. author&s thought, we feel tha', an exp anation of the development of our critical presented here is in order & Ｈｾｯｭ ･ｮｴｳ In the process of "1l'ittng our CHAPTEH FOUR we found that on.' cJ.':' ticism is of the phenomenology of EdmDnd ｬＧ ｇｓ ｾｈ 'vJ6rO spons(:;s to constD.ntl"i,T curbed "ChUit., T Hlw::;crl! s ｰｯｳＨｾＺｩ｢ｬｇ ｬＧ･ｾ The question of TranscGnclence herein ｲｬＩＺ･ｾ f this questioDe We are left saying that Hussc 'l's un- po s sib LL Ｎｾ t Y much tl' say 5: and no apparently II (1 f' j ust1.ficd lt way of S8.3'·ine :t.t 0 \I[e need to poi.Lt out) hOl.\lever, that the ､ｾｶ･ｊＮｯｰ］ ment or tbis line of thought d:td not Gnd here. Our ｉｋｾｦｒＮｏＭ viL DUCTION, written after our CHAPTER ｾｒｕｏｆ pushed this one step further and provided us with a new context for interpreting the movement of this thesis as a whole. We discovered that it was Husserl's faith in Reason which demandad f him the aquatio! of the nature possibility and necessity of a rigorols Science of Being with the nature, a.nd necess tty ur phenoinEJnology ｡ｾＩ such. ｬｩｏｊＺＮﾷＱＳｾ over, it was this equation which demanded that Husserlian phenomenology be characte:e Ｚｾｺ｣､ 'l'herefore ｾ \1/8 as a p. t losophy of IrnmanencE.l .. noted tbat the derd.8.1 of the poss5.bi.lity of a philosophy of Immanence Ct<Jhicb .,'e n.tt.empted in our CBAPT l:m )!'OUR / is not nee 8SS;.11' :tly the deni;1.1 bl.t s :Lmply the denla 1. of Bus ｓＡｽ｝ｾ f phOD01flen= 11<=111 phon- a f'tH'th9"C Clxtension and developtnert co)f our critical CO}.lments. \4·. said in om' INTRO;)UCTIOK thnt the uncrlt5.cal ncceptanc'3 to be uLtrlJ_e to the nniversality Clnd. rad:l.cality of tho ＼ＺＧｾ ｾ［ｌｊ 0 ..t' .t.v y Ｚｈｵｾﾷ［ＮｳｅＧｊ j s Ut1Ht'J.V(:r1n8 fo.5.th in Scionce demanded of (·cpc(;ially tn our note.- 227') that tho dCti1f. n<.:1 for ll.ni·\1G.l'sal· ity and radjcality frOM thG phenomenologj.cal reduction (iae., viit. the demand for a. "complete reduction!) could itself prove implicit in the meal ing of the reduction itself. But this leaves us once tions to be ans';lerec} and issues ｡ｾ ｩｮ many more Gues- ｾｩｴｨ ,0 be raised 0 Is it not true that the impossibility of a complete reduction is realized only 1n t1,)8 E.:t.t=E?nlnt at a complete redaction? Does not the II ｵｰｳｕｊＮＢｧＨｾ nm' tivatecl 1'1OI'ld lt of the as Herleau.- Panty ealls it only sho\-! forth C4gainst the background of such an attempt? ｐ･ｬｴｨｃｬＮｰｾ conJd interpret Russerl f 5 ,\,Ie calling h1JI.'t.'7jclf a Hperpetua1. beginner· 1I in this light .. of tbe ｾＰＵｓｩ｢ＺｌＱＮｪＬｴｹ of a noL qU8lJ. ｴｨ ｾＧＭＬ ＧＺｈｾ｡ｮ､ ｮｯｴｾ ｩｳｾ that \'JB '['1 .1. ,<:',., c'!v,. .1. t ..... •" 'YJO l':igOl"OUS fox.' su<:h quInt ':Jllat (l Sctence" Th:i.s derrlJl]. does onG could call the felt that ·vJ:/.th the aid of felt that sl1.ch for suffsring tbrough Jhat be Q 3clence of BelD:'; doe., Ci. gO l;unmot:tvated th(:3s0 p.1..'El1:im:i.nm·y re"Jston ;-:as not. Qesi:cable, often has rather long-'\<Jlnded attempt. on JnY' part of thing rather sjmplG to me to ｳｯｾ ･Ｑ ｳ｡ＺｲｬＮ ＧＡｩｾ I valLw 'havilig him as ono of I'IY ｾ ｣ｭ･ ... ix. s. ｬｾ･｡､･ｬＧ I \-!ish also to thank Hark F'ranklln and Paul Mailer for patiently a110H1ng nearly all of our private conversations over the past year to almost inevitably turn to the subject of HU"serl"an phenomeno1.ogY9 I hope that neither of them expect .iD. gn,y' Ｚｙｾ he completion of this thesis to decr.ease my efforts to flconv3rtlt theml Dr .. J .. Amstutz, who graciously agreed to be my pruvided me with my fi st introduction to the phe1Jomono1oB JI" of Edmund take'H1 i.i' ｾＨｨｴ .'1. -J I,.. U'E'I-.j I. .t'") ｾ ｹ _ >J in a reCl.cHng ｾｬｲ･ｳ ｵｈ ｃｏｕｉＧｾ･ Fall of 197 4 .. His thou[;htfl).l and compI'ehensi' J 8 ,i. 1.ＬＢＮｾｬﾷＧ ｾ r roOj"j'm ..., • V, ｾ Ｎｾ .. C' 4 j '_. t.) a ｷＧｬ1ｾ 4..) C' c: ,;) (, vL' ,:} C \01'1",1 v. r 6"" Ｈｾ 1. 'Co..l ,., '" , have cor tu i.nly . .. rJ. tba..nJ: him enough 1'o:r hi.;3 kindnRss and encoul'c.go:llent" my ｦｩＮＺＨＧｾ ｴ ｬＢｇｴｾｊｅＡｲ＿ I hold a sp8cial grtlt:Ltude., His ab:i.JJ.ty ed mE! t.o de" Glop THY' understanding of the His Ｎ･ｬ｢ｩＳｾｏｰ l:l:J."<,: ｩ｢ｬ･ｾ of lJusserl. fat' bey'ond that '.;hi.cb I had in tially deem., ｬｾ ＮＡｊＢ ｬ ｮＰＮ od ｰｩｷｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹ ｬＧｩｾｨｴＢ ｾｇｬ ｩｴｹ to allow a student to learn T A picture is worth a th )Usand \lJOrdsl) She alone gave me the conf1danc0 and love which I needed so much in order to finish this work c It is to her that this work is dodicated. INTRODUC1' ION Maurice Merl au-Panty ｡ｳｫ ｾ What ｩｾ phenomenology? It ｭｾｹ soem strange that this question has still to ｢ｾ asked half a century after tho ｦｬｲｾｴ works of Husserl& The fact l"emalns that it has by no means been ans\vcl"Eld" 1 We arB faced, now seventy-five years a.·tar th6 first cdi- wi th ｰｬＺｾｷｩｳｲＮｬｹ th!3 same quest ion; ｧｵ･ｳｴｩｯｮｾ｡ｩｾ Ｑ acuto the question bOCO!l1HS by and tbe more lndef:Lnito find lack of an answer t 'j;3 esscntiD.:L tc.' ·t.1lG j Cf' J ly S9 1 ｦＧＢｾ ｲｾＺ ｣ｶ nat1.lro of p1!ollDI:wnol l. l gy '", r_ i tical pb ilcfophy 15Uf;'£:!l [. :i.nk ｾ $ ｡Ｌｾ a I.'v.d·· in an articlE: (g1J.•.i:£. a':1d ｾｌｅＺｲＮｴｊＱﾧｬ｣ IIi!' an ir g 0 f .&llmm.d ［ｾＺｵｂ (:n' 11 S l1iJ.. osophy is tc 0.<'1y s-l.::Lll ＬｵｅｬｩＺｾＮ 'fbo" " " ;;J:>0und fOJ' this l:i.ns not j.n a lack ＨｾＮｴＧ ｜ﾷｊＺＱ Ｎ ｩｮＳ ＸｾＺ to undel"" stan.d on t.hc· Dart 01' ('lU: era .. bnl; l'athel' in tbf) 'I'll "'J ｾｬｴＮｊｑ uｮ ｑ ｾ Ｉ Ｌ ｬ ｦ ｴ ｾ ....... C I."': t"; ｏｾｬﾷ ｾiＩ ［ ｲ ｯ Ｑ ｯ ｮ Ｈ Ｇ Ｑ ｾ ' r;j .i I _ V "';> ｪｾ ｩＫｲｾＧ .....1 ｾ \:; .\...L 0 3 0. ) The most press.ing question ·",1e nmv face is tl .s: ｑＮｾ ｾｮ ｬｑｧｙＮ＿ OQP answer at present must ｾ No he ｢･ｾ vJas not l He feel that the unquestioned aqua" ion on the par't of Husserl of the nature, possibility and necessity of a necessity of ｊＲＮｨＢｬｮＮｑ ｭ ｑＮｯｊ ｾＺ sbO\'JS that the authentic and central meaning of phenomenology remained unknown to Hussar10 His in the possibility of Science and, moreover, ｦ｡ｾｴ｢ his impassionod need for Science, demanded of him that ｣･ｾｴ｡ｩｮ no·tiLl}S arising out of the insig1ts ｾ｡ｩｮ･､ by thB Lr ( 6 .. Ｎｾｌ ＬｮｯｾＮＵｲ ＨｊＺｬ ＩｾＮｴＸ ｴｬ ＮｊＡｙＲＬｮＮｾｬｊ Ｑ ? be una.lized stJ:'j.(;tly in line 6 presupposl ｴＺｩＮｯｮｾ 1...... tionalitJt cOl,.ld not ｾ allow h:1.s ｾ d:La. H1l8S8J.'1 perbaps of Scienco bo shaksn ｰｯｳｾｩ｢ Ｑ ｴｹ Husserl forfeitod tl8 ? ｲ｣､ｮ ｴｪｯｲＡｾ true to the goal of a ｲｯｾ｡ｩｮ ｧ \"11S l;'\otivat.ions of or questioned by the pbenoJ1wnolof.;lcf\.l that, by 0]: .i. c:i. ", Y Ii Dot 1 3J1r1 Ｎｊ｡｣ｬｾ｛ｯ ｮ･ｭｯｬｲ･ｨｰﾷｾ･ｲｰ faith in Reason and the ｜ＬｾＩＮｴｨ h.l.r- ｾＺＮ ｲｩｾｯｵｳ Hr::: feel ｓ｣Ｑ･ｮｾ radJcality demanded by ｾｨ｡ reduction by Rllowlng the goal of Science to determine tbe natU:C8 and scop<:! of qn8s+ toning the goal of Scicnce to remain itself 8 subs8qnently ｈｴＺＮｲｬＡ､ｾ ｊ ｑＮｦｴＨＩ Ｎ ｑｊ ［Ｎ ｦｩ ｾＧＡ･ a.nct thercby c:,llcM i.ng Ｑｨ ＹＱｬｅＮｾｴｨｑｮ ｟ｱ 5 and f6eJ. that Bnssc:rl did not realizG (or perhaps could not accept) the fact that his method (t!1E: pbonomenologj.cal redllction) tl'ansceiJdec1 his ') .J" implicit and unquestioned belief that phenomenology should be (moreover, must bo) a rigorous Science, to the extent that he did not realize that his "followers" (oQgo Heidegger), to be faithful to phenomenology, had to be unfaithful to Husserlian phenomenology and ｩｾｳ particular demandso It is our contention that it is precisely the e quati.on of phenomena" ogy OL11I!V.ill.llCk'1Q.Qo Th9.t omeno1.ogy "11th a gai.n9d trJ 1'l!;orous Se tence that that he equate ｈｵｳｾＧ･ｉ ｬ eO. of \<J i ｩｳｾ ｰ｢･ｮｯｭｇｮｯｬ ｾｹ ､･ｭ｡ｬＱ､Ｌﾷｾ with a..Rhi...t9.iiS"'&bX ｰｨ･ｮｾ we feel that the equatton of .hilosophy· of Immanence is a ｑＮｬｭｾｊｌ ..Q f t,1 e p1"JE-:nomenologi-:-:al rednc:tj.on" We feel t'l'Jat ＧＺｾｨｽＧｃｕＱｾ Ｍ its sD.parcood;.; Sc:Lonce and transcends ｜ｾｨ｣ ｸﾷｬＳ､ ｣ｴＺｩＮｯ Ｇ ｾ ｩｮｾ scopn to ｴｨＮＺｾ tbat :t'(. undorI;JirlCS its ･ｸｴｾｮｴ to all.-encompassing ｳｯｬｦＧｾ･ｮ｣ｬｯＮｳｵＮｲＸ ｉｊｌｴＱｪＮ ｾＬ ｰｬＧ･ｴ｣ｮｾ［ｩＨＩｮ 0 The topic of' thts thesis :i.s THE C.UBSTION OF PBENOl·mI·:OLOGICAL Ur;·lAHi?;NCE .. 'l'bcu:c.(ore., ､ｯ･ｾ Oltr CHAPT£:1 ONE not deal ',·15th tho 113.tl1l'e, pos.s:i.bjl:Lty and DElCe c),3:lty of ｰＧｨ｣ｮｯｭｾＮ｣ｯｬ ｧｹ as such, fO.l? .tl19....t. far ontrll!lS tho ｲＭｦｾｳｴｲｬ｣ｴｲＬＢ ing scope which HDsscrl's faith in Science dsruands@ ThG qnilst.;.on of phE1.nolUonological Immanence ts a q les Lion rather Be' ence of In ｃｈａｰｲｬＧ［ｾ ｒ Beine. Herein, we see that for phenomenology '1''i:!09 0 16 SO€! that the attuinmcll1t of the. spr'iere of phonomerJolog leal Imnll nence cannot be accompl isbed by a. smooth, continuous transition (or "ascension") from the natuI'@Lattitudc. Tho attatnment of the authentic meantng of phenomenology cannot be a.ccompU.""hed. wi thotlt a urad ical break!! Vlith the natural attitude, aecomplished through the performance of the phenomenological reductioDo We shall see that j.n his ｉｾｬ･ｍｾ Husssx'l l"uns in to :in1mense diff·Q ieul ties and ambL';uities in attemptinG to !tj.nitiate" his readox's by beg:Lnning his exposition of phenomenology '-lith 8. pre lirninary .P...P.JLc:..U 0 l.Ql"..;L<;,§!J. expos i cion of' eonsc ｩｯｵｳｮＰ Ｚ ｾ .. In CHAPr:'ER 'l'HRl.',E, the necessity of the perf'Ol'L1anCe of the reduction is introduced. Harein we attempt ｰ｢ｇｮｯｭｇｾｯｬ ｧｴ｣｡ｬ to t.ndicat<=: Ｈ［･ｬ｜ｴｾ 11 g1 V:1 both a (by f10 mJ:H''3pr8sentat.lons ｲｮｦＱ｡ ｾＳ &. ｮＮｩＺｨｴ ｪｾ ｉｭ ｡ｮｾ ｣ｯＹ dEl SCI' lp·- as well synthl"t.i.C c1.'3scl':i.ptio.ti of the tll1lty of phenomenological Our \J8 ths effect of comprshensJ.vG) analytic tion of thc fiuld of phenomenological as 01' ｒｾｔｆａｈｃ ｒｕｏｾ ｳｾｬ an unusual character. HerGin did not CJ.ttempt to raise challenges to Eusserl t<:llcen ｾＬＱｬＺｩＮＶｓ ｕｅ . . <Jo'k (e.go ＱＮ［Ｓｪｊ ｦＧ ＡＮｾ ｦ ｴ ＮＷｬ h'1.stol.'tcity'l h()rizon) e 8xtend,1d to the'il' ｾ＿ｬｯｧｩ｣｡ｬ conclnsiCH\\l, tl1ey outl un the ('onfines of EussEJrlian ｰｬｷｮｾﾷ in order to ShOl'J hov!, if tht,y 2.1 decisive prcsuPPo3ition in Husoerl's work, a ｰｲＰｳｵｯｩｾｮ which decidedly effects itu nature, to the Extent that this presupposition alone demands the equation of phenomenology with a philosophy of Immanencez the implicit demand for and faith in tho possibility of SciencB G It is still not decided 1hether this exposing of a centrHl ar:cl unqllGst.ioned presupposition in HUSsEH;Llan phenomenolohY is the exposlng of a central Herroldl in phenomenology itself. TrJis remains to be S8E-))10 It is dec:Ldod tha J the exposing of this presupposition of the principle of Science stringently set down by Husserl, will h pefulls emert.:B ond ShEJd light on its cent.:cal and. tiutheriti.(; ｲｮｂｴＲＮｮＺｌ ［ｾＢ I ｐｈｅｾＺｏｉＧｌｇｙ AS A PHILOSOPHY OF n-;}1ANENCE If ｲＶｾｳｯｮ is ､ｩＧｾｩｮ｡Ｌ then. j.n conlparison wi"tll man, the 11.1'0 ｾｦｮＮＺＱ｣Ｇｔｏ･｡ It is divine in ｣ｯｭｾｵ parison \'!5.t.b hut:.1an L.f'e .. But "le must not follen·/ to those ,ho advise us, being men, to think of hetman ｾｳｮｩｨＬｬＢ he:.Jing ［｣ｾＮｩＧｊｯｭ ... ｾ of' r-C.oX'·,al things, as \,,(-) cand rtake ourselves immstraj.n every ner,u to livo in a'cord- but must.· so J orLal ｮｬｾ ancc ＬｾＺｌｴＮｨ ｾ､ｮ｡ 1'8.1:' , tbe best th:i.ng Ln Ufl" •• 0 A.ristotle ｜ .I.Ｇｮ ｊ ｾＭＧｖ l.:;'·"i,,! (;ｾ ［ｾｨＺ Ｍ t ｯｭ･ｵｬＬｾ ｹｾｴｌＧＭｬﾷＢ '-P.. ,., C.I. • """ Ｎ［ｨ｟ｾｴ ｩＭｾｬＧ __ ＺＮｊｴＧＭｾ ｟Ｎｊｾ d_D.·i.'J'.• ｉＮＬｾ ｧ \J _ \,,1.-'''l'C,1, ' Ij • !_ ,J 'Irs c .\ 'e'.'./.,ＢＨｲＧｾ［ ＮｾＺ［ f...;,.. ... '- .... ' ｩＧｾＭ Ａ ｌ［ ＧＩＨＢＺＫ v to ｴｲＺ［ｊＮｩｾ｡ｴｅＧ .. .ｾ｜Ｌａ I' ｾ｣ l.l,q" 7;i-ｬＧｪｾＭ［ｬＺｾＧ ,_ ..,J,,- the I,l...... and very progl'aJ..l1lG ﾷｯＭ ｾＢ ［ ＩｬＭﾷ ｴＺ ［ -:':;'--p"::-t)';,;'tl.,.. ."" _ ....(.:, ._to.......l. the nature of ｴｬｳ｣ｪｅｈＱｃＨｾｧ ft of the ,\,orld The Pl'(\Cl.:.;c diff01'er.(;:) bebolcon those terliis shall hopefu.lly ome.r;;o as H!3 ｾＮ､ｇｂｃｏｴｬｐ r :uri ｉｬｳ｣ｩＰＱ ｃＨｾＢ ".I':<C).L-· _ - (> (6) To show how it is that Husserlian phenomenology 1s and must be such a philosophy will require a discussion of its nature, possibility and necessity. Yet in these dis- eussions, we shall' un up against difficulties inherent in any pro1 4 mlnary expos.:l.tion of tho phenomenology of Edl und Husserlo \'Je shall then att(-Jmpt sho':J how these dlffictIltles ｾＨＧｉ are essential to the very nature of phenomenology itself and hOVl they in fact display ph ElttOrliA no logy , s erwractsl' c S a Ent:f'cu'l e into E1mund Husserl T oS thought poses many difficultles o By no mORns the .. cast of these is that it o(:c:nr In fae t 0 1 Perhaps it will become manifest that the total pbcno,:neno log leal at t ittJcle v,nd ttl!;; epochc be ｾﾷｧｮｯｬ :i.ng: to it H1.'6: destined :j1) essf.r)c\,,? to effGct 3.t first, (" ･ｬ｢ｩｾｲ｡ｰ cOG1TJlste in th,j ｢ｇ［ｾｬｲＺＮｮｩ ｅｲＮ ｬＮ Ｚｮｯ［ｾＧ Ｑ ＾Ｈｰ ＵｄｯｬｴＮＩｾＱＡｲ Ｈｦ［ｅｉｈＮｆｲｴ ＬＮｾｮｯ｣ to a rGlj.giolls conve}'", sion, \·.'hl.c:ll thon, hm'leVel' ｾ ove' cwd abuv8 this n ""'i'-'t:' ·th.;v ""lffY'o-j/'jc'a')co tJ !..·c .....'" "'"'l'-lj;'"' hJ.., •• J.' J"-,.,-::>1<' .,\...><:'_. o.>J.".u._.l., f. ·e Q'; o"P 'j ("'l-:"; f' + ·t' ｬｾ 1 ｾＧＱＢ.V:f........ ':., n ｾ '1' r !""it:] ·l,.l .1' O'j \i t, "I (. 'b as a task ·0 ｀Ｆｮｋｬｮｾ as such" .l. IJW ＧＭＺＮｉＭＢ ｾ ＧＺＬｽ ｊｴＺ［ﾷ｟ｬｶ .... _ t .... r\ " ) .c j .l ｛ｊｾ .... ｾ ')f ·t"lle c.. . ..ＫｾＧＢｇ ,.1.,,<.1.;....,).I.) c' ........ '".: 'J' ? J_\""\..L ;', '" ." .j <, ..... :) 9 source arJ0 unde,;:st.o. 1ding o:r its O\·m, nature, possibil5.ty and ｲｇｱｵｩ［Ｚｇｓｾ ｮ･｣ｇｳ ｬｴｾＱ tbat iS 9 that ,<Ie see 11ov] it :Ls that 1s a philosoply of Immanenceo it ｰｨＸｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬＨｾ ｹ 8., Philosophy ｾ 'l.·lisdoJ (2.i3.K2.§g) -- is the ｰｨｩｬｯｾ ｳｯｾ izer's quite personal ｡ｦ ｡ｬｲｾ It must arise as h.;k§. vJisdoill, as his ｳＸＱＮｲｾ｡｣ｱｵＺｌｲＨＧＺ､ knoHledp;e tendi _g toward universality, a knovl1eclge fo:r \,)hich he can answer from the beginning, and at each step, by virtue of his own absolute insights. 10 quest for t110 establishment of philosophy as a rigorous ccienee is the demand, implicit in this quest, to d seaver and secure the 11 correct Philosophy as a rigorous Science demands full clarity and certatnty" It nmst beGin '1;J:l.th <HJc1 bl1.ilc1 npon B. solJ.d fCilJ.nd!3.tion ostablisbBd \'Jh .ch philosophy as Sd.et1ce 1s not Bussert tells ｕｾ ｰＨｾｳ ｩ｢ｊＮｯ at ｴｨＮ Ｇｯｵｦｾｨ an... that he: to an intellectu8J nE'!DtnBss ｾ but contemporn"'y Ｇｐｨｩ｝ＨＩｓＧｬｰｨｹｾ \'lh:l.cb m.:.l::E':s so l:1uch oJ: :1,!:;S ｾ｣ｬＮｲｌｴｮ･＾ｪＺ［ｳ chal.'ac:tl.:(', in fact" falls .far ｛ｾｨＰＱＮＧｴ of It, ;'nd so 1:.rjnr.;s contewpt on t.he .. ｨｾｊｩＺＢ is to be the cc>nStl1i1iiJti··, tdc,::d of ｰｨＱ ｯｾＺＨｩｰｨｹ tj.c:u 0.1 pll t"h0 ｓｾｃＱ Ｈ ｃｓ :Lr1 t,11c [nost ｬＱ｡ＧＳｩｾ［ ｳ･ｲｪ ｡ｾ NOl' ,",'as this trnC-i o.nl.v· of the ｰｨＺｌｬｯｾＺ ｔｊｬ ＩＧ of tLat dF.'-"e All nhU osun1'1v hennC1ftthed to us hv" historjT ｉ］ＩｲＧｾ ｶ｣ ｩ c: ｾﾷ･ ｲＱｴｬ Ｎｩｾｦ ;:1arkEld GVGry,:rhore by·letel; of' cl.su:' ::.ty ｾ ilflfJla.tU1:'0 v d p;uerV:l 58 and :incC>fllpl etcne ss ｾ if Dot actuAl intelloctual disl0nesty. Tj0ra was .notbing om3 could tako fl'om it, no fra ｾ［･ｩｮｦｭｴ uno could l'c'lC:J.in as :1 solid ｢ｃｊｾＭ［ｪＮｮ ＵＮｮｧ of more 8'lrnt;Jst J.nqu:.i.:t'y ｾ cr 5.tlc:Ls!Tl'} ｢ｏ｜ｬｮ､ｾｳ B.nd '!dGr·thless, ｢ｯｾﾷ caWiC :j.t lc:{(; ked. sol td ｦｏｌｬｾ､ＸＮｴ ion f'rt,ra wh1ch it could be fruitfully ｾｵｩ､ｇ Ｌ was of ｾｯ helpo ovlas I found ｴｨﾷｾＬＭｴ C 0 ｵＬｾＸ｣Ｑ 12 Husserl l s conception of philosop:ly as a rigoy'ouS Science demanded of him that this "solid foundation ll , this necessary ground of absolute' y justified and certain knowledge be sought and securecL This the first and centl·a.l bf3COHl6S definition of the nature of a rigorous Science as well as its first task: to discover the justifiable basis upon which it may proceod. Thin radically critical demand lead Husserl, in an article entitled "Philosophy as Rigorous ｴｨ｡ ｾ Science" (1911), to r a11zo e ｄｾＱｩｬｯｳｰｨｹＬ ｡｣ｯｲ､ｩｮｾ to 'ts historical purpose the loftiest and most rigorous of all Sciences, rep.resenting as it does hl1ill8n:l.ty's imperishablG dS!land fol' pur e and ＸＮｬＺｳｯｬｵＺｴＨｾ kno';'J leQf,'8" " i <; 1ncapablo of ｣ｾｳ ｵｭＺｩ ..ng thE'! 'rm of rlgoro\Js sciencClo (j 13 ',F . ',., J' 10 1." Ｂｾ ':J c·.I E' .\1 0" '"[J ;:,', <'" '.' 1 e J. 1 . . .... J co 1).:> ｾｴＮｂｨＫ ｾ I do ｾｯｴ say that ｰｨｩｬｯｳ ｰｾｹ is an impurfect science; I say ｾ､ｲｮｰｩ［ｹＧ that it :Ls not a se ience 9 t. g.J..l ｾ that as scienco It bas not yet ｢ｅｈｾｬｭＮｯ Ill, r, ｲＬ｣ ｾ re-awakcnine of the Ideal of philosophy as rigorous Hc - , l' '-'... a ｰｨｾＮ｝ osophy cap8bJ.c of lj.-ving u:n to its ilhistol':Lcnl As a 11) It () .. "HC:i.ElllCe of ｂｾｌｩｲｬｮＱＮ ｧｳ［ a I ,. pUl"'= fil'st philosophy? Il J, in a mHnnor to the searching out of the "conaitions for ｾ｡､ｩ｣ｵｬ ｴｨ｣ｾ ＾ｾｵｈ '81'lian pherlOrnenology ､･ ｩＨｾ｡ｴｦ｜ｳ pos3ibilit y H of all experience and k.no :i. tself 1. 8c1 ge -= ｾ 10" the very ItgroundU of expel' E::nce itself of Being 1s possible only if this A rigor'ous Science 0 is not left pre- ･ｲｯｾｮ､ supposed, but is revealed and made the object of ｾ ｪＲｮｧｬＬ However, it seems that phenomenologyt s directtng j. ｊｳ Ｎﾣｾ｢ｴＮ Ｌ itself towards this rational secaring of the ､ｱＬｾｇ uPhi.. losophy of Beg '.nniJgs ll : ｾｮ､ｵ｢ｩｴ｡｢ｬ･ Th:i.s descriptj.on of phenomenology's task tells us that it is not only directed lihl£12. i t str··ves, but it tells us l-hat phenomenology ｡ｬｳｯｾ ts ufJ.nblo to comluenee and eontinue 1'Jith the ｳｾｴ ｩｴｾｳｊｦ until that H (; Ｂｂ･ｾｩｄｮｩｄｧＢ is rationall.y secured !.J.t.s . .u i G H of .\.v h is trJ. '31,-\. as a ｰ｡ｲ､ｯｸｾ it has ｴｾｬｳ ｩ 0I .f I) ｐｬｾ＾Ｇ ....... Ie . 1)(J· a C} I • bel '1' i V [;, .• ｾＬ I-Jf' ... l' JYCI. bO' t. We shaJl como to soa that it t"l·l I.L.. ＮｾＭ oJ ｾ ｳｾ｡ｮ､ｳ as such precisely because we romain 'outside" of this 'fbis pc.radoz: iefi,llGS the ttpathos tT ian phenomenolo3r, if not all rDtional It Cf.ll1.ght ll ｾ 16 01' ｈｵｳ ･ｊ［ｬｾ＾ for it 1s ｩｮｱｵｩｾｹＬ because of it.s dGmanci for ｪｬ Ｎｴｾ ｩｦｪＮ｣｡ｴｩｯｮｳ in the qocsLion -f its own possibility. Yet it is here that we f .. net tbe essent:Le.l distin;?;u'Lsh:LrW mrl:r.k of Huss8rJ. f s project,: of the It Hcginrdl1G H tn an exp:J.:i c 1 t manner :Ls the expos 1ng of philosophy to a radical ｳ｣ｬｦＭＸｸｾｭＧｮｾｴｩＰｮ ＮＺｾ ,'I )'_...n-....,...... --I .., ...... _ '"'\1.11", ........ Ｑｾ possibilitY.!ilJl philosophy" It cannot? by its very nature, allow its own possibility to go unquestioned or remRin obscure to ito ［､ｾ Ｎ Hence 5 Busserl tells us in his (1913), the task and very definition of philosophy itself is marked self-criticism and need for self-justificatione Be says that: i,.J i A ph:Llosophy th 13r'o blema tic foundations '1>]5. th 7 P doxes \·!h:i.ch ar :LSG fr.'om the n bsc;ur i ty of the ｦＧｵｮ､ＸＮｾ ffiont3.1 concgpts, .is not ph ｩｌＩＢｯｾＩ［ＧｹＬ :1. t con t:r' a( :i.c·"'.s its very m8H.n:i.nr; ｬＧ｡ﾷｾ Phil.osophy can take .n§.. ＼ｬｾｨＩＡｯ＾ＮｾｬｩＮｮﾷｰ root c-n.ly in ra,cHca 1 ref'J.exio.t'l. upon the meaning and ｰｯｳ ｬ｢ｾＮｬ ｴｹ of its m·m ･ｲＱｉｾｨ･ｳ 'Th>:ou::l1 sucb rGflexion it mus [-; in the very fil'st place and througn :1. t,[. ovm 0 activity taks p l,):e ｬ｡ｴｰＺＷＧｃＡＮﾷｦＩＨ［ｾﾷｊｅＢｉｐ ［･ｶｾ ｳ ｲｰ i 1''' t"l ., C).\,'j" ＺＮｾ.j t:r.......".L cf the absolute ground of 'vJbieh is :Lts c\'!n pJ.'oper ｾｮｩＲ ｡ it must ｣ｲｾ｡ｴｯ r1 • 1 ,. .-: ,. t 0 _.• 'Y'i'; ... n":3 aci 6"1\10 t"IJ.y ei.\.t.JU ..,....ｕＮｾ ｬＬ ,1,'.':' r.! ()I.,.y,,<'9 ｰｯｳｾＸｳ ｩｯｮ Ｌｮ･ｬｾ ｊＭＨ｣ＱｪｊｃＧｩＺｾＸｰｸ･ ａｶＱｴ｣ｾ ｬ･ｳ \') .. ("l " '\ t·,.-" "-' C... 0'L'(.c;,.' ＮＧｾ 'lo .l, • ｡ｮｾＱＮ so ｩｾｇＮｮＨｾ ﾷＧ｡ｬＱｹ ｴｬＧｾＮ ｮｾＺ ［｣Ｂ Ｉｲｇｮｴ ,ILl,.rllHl..,C 1 ", '. .;. { ::l1'J Ｎｾ ｾ I' , ﾷｾＮＺ ｬ ｌＺ ［ｲＳ 1'0:1.' :t ｾＮＺｴ ･ｾＨｮＱｩｶ､ｯ 1:111 a bsul1..1t.sly methu.L ThA.i:'e can he no ｵｮ｣ｬ･ｾｉ［ e 1'W ". d . t:1 ..,,, "i" (.. ｾ ｬ ［ ｏ Ｇ ｜ ［. ･ＮｴＩ ＺＭ［Ｉｾ . , " ' 1 ' " anc1...· LO .ld. ... a.oxv .l.dlJ "d11\,).tG ｡｜Ｉｾ 1 seance or th:1..s proce;?dul:'G ｾ t't'1S ｯｶ･ｲＮｬｦＧＨＩｉｾｩＱ of the :i.:r:...:!enso dLff 3.cul t:i.es attClchtn.£ themsolves to a cOJ.:'rect r C' ",. I1 • I ' ｾ［ＬＧＺＮｈｦｩ［ｾ ｾＨＮﾷｉｊＺＬｯｌＱｚｮ ｨｾｴＮｳ tG to ll::lVG dono 'wi th tLem ｾ ht=td tb L:: for :i.ts com'oqucnc8? t1"1('-I., \-I(' 1'<)'1 and have' n,)ny ･ｶｯＮｾ ﾷ neH philof,o1. ｵ･ｇｬｮｾＬ " ｰｬｾｊＮｩ n'l.-l·j('a1 .l . ......'"'... . " (,I... 'CtlE\ !lsVC:'-IlI'l",a l . . -... wi Ｎｾ ＾ "'" ....,..... up , ［Ｚ｛ｬｕｾｲ･ｶｯ｣ ｴ＿ＨｬＧ｜ ﾷＬＢｩ ｾﾷｬＮ ｯｲﾷｬＢＬｈ ... ...... ｾ ..ＢＭＬｾ v 01r, ﾷｾｴＱ･ hJ, bl'+ (.,t..... no·1." V ＩＺｲｬＧＱＭｾ l, .. C 0'-':;' ｾｬｶ ｬ｣Ｎ｜ｳｃＧｮｪｾ \'fl1ieh as ｉ､ｯ｡ｾ nn0.(:l'LLef; all tb8 ｰ｢ｩｔｯＳＰｾＮ phi.w, that (:an be imrl.z5nod" ｆｨＺｩＮｬｏｾ［ｄｰｨｹＬ 2.3 it moves ｴｭｶＺｈＧ､ｾＳ its ｲｾ ｡Ｎｕ ＷＮ｡ｴｩＰｮＢ Is not a l'eln.tjvely Ｚｬｮ･ｩＩｭｾ it r;oes f01'\'Ja:ed. ｾｬＮＧｨ｣ｲｯ liE)S ｾ ... ,'" -\ -.L'.):"Opuy .. -.' , .. aｾ Ｚｲ､ＨＮｊｾ［ＩＬｌｪｓﾷ｜ r·",,··.' ". In ' e,.'::> ldL.. ｄＮｾ c. ＱＳｾｕ Ｚｾ ｜ｕ frE!i:>clom from pI.ote scJ f"1)'WC J., ipl'OVJ.nrr ＨＧ Ｑ Ｇ ＩＨＺＧ ｾＧ i .J . . · ..;...... ",.1.(,(,,' ... 1,,5 lih'r .. l ni .nlt,.,. ,,;,1 the ｲＺｾＱＮｴ Ｈ ｬｲ of ｦＨＩｬＮ ｮ､｡ｌＧＺ ｜Ｉｭｾ a ｡ｬ ＮｰｾＸｳｕｐ ｯＳｩｴ ｯｮｳｾ bas J.S ｾ , .. " l? ｳＸ｣ｵｾｩｮｧ D.S for itself an absoluto 12" vhe ｳｯｵｲ｣･ｾ of justification for both :ts IDethod (its IlhO\Il") and its ｭ｡ﾷｾｴ･ｬＺ (its "where"), for the questions of li.itJliD._th§L...h9.. r::i:.?:.R.J:1 the "hOi'!" and the " v/ here" must both occu:e demand for self,,·justlfic.:atiofJ .. The full thrust of thesG questions for phenomenology and their need for a.n an Si'-ler by means of phenomenology cannot be fully understood from tioutside ll of pl1enomenology, for phenomenology i§. in :l ts very essenco, the posing of these questions and the demand and souree of their anS"i,'l(ll'C'" 18 ｹｧｯｬ ｮ･ｭｯｮ･ｬｾ ive ,f.0.9, ｾｮ･ｨｴＬ for ｈｵｳ ｾｲ Ｌ has a ､ｩｳｴｮ｣ｾ a cti::,tinctivG elairn: all(.. n/)t C'J aIm to be allvt1-dn;! morn 'chan an atteln()t i' ｾＧＬ l_t..... " ,-' 'r)f'1 ,., 1', r...,.L 11''' 'oJ"''',. ＬＮﾷ ｾ Ａｬ i1<"' 0' ｾｉ "f 1'1 e r1 PC',.0._ " (.!.. P.",,,.' <" 0.(' llrlO ,."! ; i- ［ｾ :t··· .1... ｾ ou (... f-v "'j '/, ｏｾｬ J.. 8xcltl:3i ｶ ｾ ｬ ｊ c'i ＬＨｇｾＢＺＮｊ cod to,'! ard3 this 011':'] Gnd; to (1: sＢＧ......... ｲｾｬＱ (:.» ') ... ,,/ 1 i ｲｾ Cl 1 jYl r' l'•.--.::..:, ."> \")ＺｾＧＭ ｾ t·, ....... .? r·J.·<' n1 ,,/'t'\ i C 11 S >,.v 0 1 -; 'J'... to, r;' 0 ｾ'(J' 'I'j ,r ｾＮ Ｌ l. ｾﾣｬＺＮ Ｇ ［Ｎ Ｂ Ｚ ＢＮ Ｚｾ｟Ｍ Ｌ ＢＧＺ ｾＮ ＬＺ ｟ -/ }Jl.J d ). ＬｉＮ ｾ Ｌ :c:epAat D, r,J'11.1tla.n pi.U'USe, :1'\d.. 11. be ahlE! to prosent i.t- L', ｾＧＱ Ｂ ｶ ｾ ｓｾＨ［ ＮＳＬ CJ. t:J J ＮｾＬｲ ... \.:0",,, ｾＮＬ fJ,'c:: .... '.... l., ... I"J slilf as a sc lence t' W0 DJ.' ｾＨ not yet a. blo to " 19 \.El1E.r s(,and the fl)J,l thrus t of ｴｨｩｾ［ demand" rfhe clai::'J of an a.spiI'a.t:i.on to Science has been 1i1ude so often ｴｨｲｯｵｾｨｯｵｴ ｴｨｾ history of pbilosopby, that we have eome to doul)t, its possibility, let alone toJls us SUPI-ios.ing ｴｨｾｴ to seek and in all quest 'oning Rll<1. j ts Ｋ ｨ Ｂ ｾ \., ｵｳ･ｲｉＱ ｮＨｪｾ［ｳＢ t-'. cHl:':>\',lt"lrins and 110 cHith 20 ex:;, t.e; already :i.mmediato and pelts is tent ｾ itself i a. que.:.'tioning of the grou.nd of Yet philo::;opby tl ｱｵ･ｳｴｩｯｮｾ ｮｾＬ ､｣ｭ｡ｮ｣ｩｾＬ 13 .. ing an answer. In the attempt to give a preliminary exposition of the nature of phenomenology as a rigorous Science, vIe have seen whJit_ii_lle.mandii? but if' the difficul t.y of making a beginning described above is not Wholly spurious, 'lA/a have seen, 1'1 a prel:Lminary '.vay, hmvever ｾ that the nature of phenomenology as a rigorous Science and the methodological access to that ature both fall i:litbin the scope of' ology .. vie caanot fully unrte:cstand its nature :Lf noutside tl of thRt nature; pbeno.r.enology t ｾﾷｮ･ｭｯＱｬ ｨｰ ｬＮｾ･ｴｦｬ｡ｩｮ "J6 ust bo undel'stood ｾ 2 so • -1-0 .... '" .:> 1'8'" H I, f'.r' ,,-Irn co<..".. .1 • ＮＱ ﾷｾ v l' ＬｾＮ "J.e: .'1.' \.111 It 0 If _ understandirg of ｾｨ･ "t could not claim to bEl D. l.'igo!'()uS Science ｾ for then its complnhansion would remein transcendent t it and self- 0\4n ｴｨ･ｲｾ｢ｹ full self-justjflcatioDo The ｡ｾｭ of a ScioDce. accoraing to ｲｩｧｯｴｵｾ Hus.:.;erl? is to iflquiro int.o and i.nsight, the which one ｄｾｙ ｾｲｯｬ ｄ､ of all ｵｮ｣ｊＮ ｲｴｨｾ ･ｸｰ･ｲＮｩ･Ｎｮｾ･ ｴｨｲｯｵｾｬ rational and knowle.d?;e l);Oll1 proceed With a clear and distinct explication of t1 at oxper ienc B" As i'! e h,- va Ｎｳｅ ｾ･ｬＱＬ fOl' ph 11080p1ly as r i,;orous Sc lence, the quest ton of hOI!} one may begil ｾｴｊＮ｣ｨ a1 :l.nquiry becomes the nnavoldable ｦｴｲｳ ｾｑＮ ｬｊＮﾧ ｬｊＮｾｑＱｬｯ 'rhrough l'adical reflect ion, the que st ion of the poss i bili ty of' rigorous Science becomes the central question for rif,OrOU3 ScieDce c We shall come to sea, therefore, that if in fact posed tbis question have ｾ "IC have, in a. ｴｏｌｩｬ ｊ Ｚｾｩｧｊｶ･ﾧＮＬ The qlH=3stion '.vB nov/ face is this: Upon \'Ibat basis may this Sc:ence proceed? We have had some indicat'on it must, in soma sense, P ovlde itself with its own t12 basis; its basis of inquiry must be tra.nsparent to it, for uch transparency of the r'.round of its Ov711 endeavour. , vJithout th::,t grour d. is left pre S uI1poserl •. i·'Ii th s ncll a fundamenta 1 at 0.11 .. The as '.-Ie 11'7 ""hieb HussArl Ｎｾ｣ｩＸｊＩＨｾ･ to initiate, ｩｾ ｳｨ･Ｌｳ may not take as i t'J norruB,ti 1,18 glll,de ｾ SCiGne0; do not yet ｶＡｾ Science will 'ake, VJhat form it should .0 ｴｾｬ ｷ krll\'l any otht3.t" vlhnt form this n(·n.,r we must not presuppose ... ｇｨｐｾ norms of ft of tima ｾｬ･Ｘ､ na tu1'nl thr- SC 9l1CG must themselves be put into question, a questioning that 11--ＧＭｔＺ ｏｾＧＱＭ ;::r";':l,.,) -n-;::' \1 .ｴ［ＧｾＺＭｆｵ j-:-Z,c ..ｬＨＢｊＺｾＭｲｩＬ J.... c.. . , . ., i Y';l-,,:\-:L' 7';Yi--,.7 :ri---l1'--;';-c'";;':'-)-/7'c':-';:' <A. 1 l, ll to the Hscj,ences of tlJe IoIOJ,'ld in tho prE:LisG scn,:;ee Tho 8(-:) tGrms oye meant to j ndi(..:;.n.;e t.hat ｴｨＨＬｾｓＭｊ sc'i.enc(:;s are Sc.iEmCIJS Itof the f:9.t'),ral et:t5.tude tl as dQfi,nod be 1m·} in OUl' '':::T-IlI.PTr.;:'' ＢｏｊＧｾｔ It should be }J()intcd out that for phenomellolo.;y, ealling these ｳｾｊＮ･ｮ｣ｇｳ llnaivc lt Or' ｬ［ｾＮ＼ｲｵｴ｡ｮｬ j s hv n·) means :i.nte Yl::'d to ｢ｾＱ ､ｏｬＧｯ Ｌｾ｡ｴｯｲｶＢ ThH term c are ＡＱ･ｬＧ ｉ｜ｾＺﾷｲＮ｡･ＺｷｴﾷＱＺｯＭ［ｉｾｔｬｮ･ＭﾷｦｬＱＮｪｳ･ scierwes ｾ［ Ｍ ｩＱｾＨＮＺＷＭｾｦｬ Ｑ ｉｌＱﾷＭ ｾｨ･ＺｇｾﾷＢ Ｐｳ ･ｮｴｩ Ｎｬ \I ••:J ｾ _to •• ｾ .. -...l U ｴＭＢ ＺＧ･ ｾｬ _ J ."" r,atuE0c .\<':1.- J L ., As ,... ｾ shall ｳ･ ＭｾｃＳｉＧｯｷｾ U • '. J" '" .:) 0 " v}j,thol.1t this Hne.:LvetyH, t;hese science i'JOuld 'lot bc possible at al ｊＮｾ Husserl felt was not initiated by Descartes, who based his philosophy on the normative ideal of mathematics and 22 geometry. Hence, Husserl tells us that: As beginning philosophers, we do not as yet accept any normative ideal of science; . nd only so far as we provide it for ourselves can we ever have such an ideaL B'.lt this does no+ 1m"'ly that. ｾＧｊ･ renOUD(;8 tbe gen9ral alm of gl'oundtng science absolutely" That alm shall inde0;cl continually motivate the course of our ffisditation" " ,,; and ｧｲ｡､ｵ ｬ ｹｾ in our meditations it shall become determined concretely .. Only vie must be careful about hCfl..\l vlB make an absolute grounding of science our aim" At first, ｾ･ must not presuppose even its p03sibility .. 23 a ODce again arises from the r0-GmergGDCa of ｣ｩｲｾｬ｡ｴｹ Ｘ｣ｩＶＮｮｾ･ tb5.s q:..wsd.oJ:1, If" thi' rn " )'ｾ 1 l..,l-'II tn....... of J'l'j.v c' i', ]' ..1'': .L. ,'. u<::It . .'j 0" _.....d H ｾ is to 'YJb.8,t up.!.'OdllCG its DVm is to 1Jrevent it from being completely arbitrary? It is t1US tont the qnestIon of Hevtdcnc:e" arises., F1m:' a r igOl'OlJ.S Sc l!?nce Ｇｩｾｯ be Rble to "take rad ical l'l'\flGctL'll (a 1'o.£'1cc t i0.ti ｰｯＺ ［ｳｾ Ｚｩ on vlbose chm'8 ｾ tel" yet to IH"IOeT'stand); i.<!C a:ce able to ｧｾｩｮ 0: \.,'U b(1\1(;-; acees;,.; to this 'Vlb:L'"'h is givon in snell a mannel' as to exclude thE! po,ssir.Ji1:ity of' ｵｮＺ ＧＬＨｾｲｴ｡ｩｲＮＺｌｹ and the:t.'Gby allO'.'/ ｳｯｬｦＧａｾｪｵｳｴＮｩｦＧｹｩｮｧ of ttl.is ev:Ldence" This acc:ess v,rj.ll allow us to the ci:rcle" \\'9 possession :lbl'E?ak have described. above. EussfJrl tells rGference to this ｡ｾ｣･ｳ Ｌ that: into ｾ others emerges, as & the in n.ldlg" ｊｵｾｲｹ the .besjn- ｴｨﾣＭ ｌｾ ＿ｴｩｯｾ｟ｰｦ for those cognitlons that are flrst in themselves and can support the \>Jho1e storied edifice of universal ｫｮｯｷｬ･､ｾ･Ｆ Consequently, if our presumptive aim is to be capable of b·coming a practically ?osslble one, us meditators, while destitute of all scientific knowledge, must have access to evidences that already bear the starn of fitness for such a function, in that they are recognizable as pr8ceeding all otber ｾｮＺ｡｛［ｩｮｈ｢ｬ･ cvidencasQ Moreover in respect of this evidence of prGceoding, they must have a certain perfection, they must carry with them a l absolute certainty, if advancing from them ana constructing on their basis a scierlee governed by the idea of a definitive system of ｫｮｯｷｬ･､ｾ･ -- considering the infinity preslulled to be par-t of this ldea -.- :l.s to be capa liLa of having any senseD 2t+ 1>Jh:Lch ·1:\.11 gua:cantEJG and secure v.n v ｩ､ｾ［ｮ｣･ s and only vJ Ithin transparcncylt of method the tl' scope ,. 'J:bh-: ｮｾ｣･ｳ ｩｴｮ ･ｳ ｾｴ a bsol ute thDt tho acee:'>s t.o ph8.rlOmeJ:,ol.ogy IS of to these evJdencfls ') ｾＧ ｇ ･ｾＨ｡ 1WO blam-sphcrG lnflt Jod of :i tse1.l' be a pa:('t ｰｨｂｮｲｭ･ｮｯｬ ｧｹｾ YAt have we not heard Russorl say, in the above clted pas sage,. ｴｨＮｾ t \'ie no(!d. to beg in tb is inqllh>y by bej.l".g SeienGG to bE! possi ble 1f rel:Laoc(-l U},x'fl is denj,ed us? HerG agajn thp. cil'cula1'it *W e--?h7iI1'UﾷｳｭＭ［Ｑﾷ･ｔｾＱｴＭ･［Ｚ 4 r;}1E,11C)IDei::;o J if ｯＧ［Ｚｔ｣｡ｾＭｲ r c ! llo\!Iedgo ｾ｣ＺｩＮｯｲ､ＮＺｪ ｦｩＮ･ arj sas in a nevi fo.r.'I1l, e Ｈｦｬｾﾷｃ i Or1ｏｐ･ｴＧｾ Ｈｩ (71".1 e II nd s imply Ａｾｲ･､ｵ｣ｴ ton ? Ｚｬｮｴｆｲ｣ｨｙｾ｡｢Ｉ y .. Hn feet]. that q i.n t.he present ｣ｯｮｴ･ｪｾｴＬ this ｳｴｭｔＩｬｩｦｪＢ｣｡ｴｾＮｯｮ :l.s W8.\'j:antee] .since the prec:U:;8 d iff'el'8J.1ce betweon the se terms is Lc relevAnt to aD)' H exp()::, i tion." 17. and the difficulty 0 f penet.ating the fundamentally new sense of Husserl1s phenomenology re-emerges$ Let us reformulate this difficulty, a difficulty that we shall see 1,s inherent in the transj.tion to an understanding of the problem-sphere of phenomenologY4 ｈｵｳ ･ｲｬｾ｡ｮ "Ie 8.re sesteine is kno1tlledv,e of the ground of ｜ｾｨ｡ｴ the conditions for the possibility of all experience oxperience4 Yet, if we seek for kn01ledee of the conaitions of knm<Lodgt':;, if we seek a Scientific gl'outK1.ing of scl.ence, are we not presupposing as possible that vary discipline "lhasa possibility t,</Q are attemrting to Astab1.tsh, ＲＮ ｴｾＢ 9 for the possibility of knowledge, if that very seeking, as ;.3. <{"J.est for IUlOvJll2,dge, prosupposn s those co nd':' tio) 2, rests ｾｯｳ ing of this difficultYt in fact, tho realization of itD full import, 1s by n \'le ann them? UpOll The Yet ::> means ｳｩｭｰｬ･ｾ are ohle to g:l18 8. prelilllinal'y indicBtj.O.i.l nt' tts solution and gravity by notinc that this difficulty rasts Ill. ", ｾＬＢｊ hJ. .. ｾｕ ')' .,-1 c;·-=" H ....... l...,(,,\;) It c; .......,,:'> 1" '.l' ,:; \ lC ＢＬＡｾ V"It".t'-- V.I. \:; 26 Husserl \-J:i.shes He ｾ s speak lng of (,,'ld ･ｾｴ H <) .. to found 8. nov] scj.0.iJceo It qu.Lc ing somotb tng 'v;ho lly n0"; ｾ does not, need not and cannot, by its very nature, COJ:H.;ern 18 .. itself w:Lth the cond1tlons for its ml/n posslbili tyo Our llnatural attitude tt , ｯｌｕｾ normal intel'course with the vwrld, takes as its thematic sphere of possible knmvl edge the \'Jorld,o TbE1 problems tba t ar lse v11th in this It na tural ll pre suppos i.t ion of the i>lOrld are called by phenomenology llmundane problems"" Herein lies tle need fot' the fundamental distinct10n betHeen ph8nomenolo,.,Y directed to\'JO.rds 1.5 Ｂｾｴ " experisl cs: transcendental experienco." that u" ｾ &a 28 n8\'1 l\5.nd of And he adds .,i'lh8i"e thor e is a nevI exper.'.6JJCe, a n81'1 science 29 ･ｬｾ !TIust keep :\.n L:linc. 7 tbe:C'efo1:G ｾ thb.t S6nse; the precise concern of phenomenology and its essential direction nf inquiry cannot be seeD in We shall ha S '(3 to the ｲ･ｦ ｲｳｾ｣･ qui t.e a lot more t.o sny a bout t1J:i.s be 1m.,r vie shall sec belo;'J, thl::: does not mean ｴ ｊｾ 0 ph8noniEmologr is uDnoncerned with natural eXistence; i t means simply that lLs (:OJ.1('81'.n fell' the tlnatul'al atU.tuc1e lt i;; nor ､ｩｲＨｾ｣ｴ･ Ｑ tbe concerns fOLl.nd vJithin th0 1hatural atti·t.udo n Husser by " Hence, tells us that: What makes he ｡ｾｰｲｯｩ｡ｴｯｮ of the essential nature of phGnomonolosy, thE! und 81' stand in?; of tho pecul iar meaning of its relations to all other sciences • . • so m:.:;rcJo_'d.lnar i1)" cL.. fficul t 9 • s tha.t In add :i.. tio 1 tc 27 all other adjustments, §:'_lW.ｾｮＮｊ＼ｬｯ ｟ｌｧＮ.ｙＺＲｬｊｴＬ at, one that contrasts at fJY..i'}•.I'.¥ J2.Q..int 1;) ith the natural a tt ttude of exper ience and thought" ｴｬ ｩｮｧﾣｾｩＮ ﾧ Ｎ ｊｾ ｳｬ Ｙ 30 We cannot fully understand the necessity of the above mentioned equi.vocati.ons and their assem,ial source urtil we bave attained this radically new npoint of view" required by the concern for rigorous Science. The difficulty of full.y 81 tlcj dating these equivoca t ions cannot b8 fur thet" clarified at this point, for we have not yet as ablished 110'/] eOl":!C°i-:l'.!JO n 'loJ} til the possj bility of a rts;orVl)s only in its most general outlj.nes. It needs to be ｂ･Ｑｾ mentioned at thj,s ur8J.imiD8r V v J. l1ov;ever If of ｓ｣ＺｩＮ｣ｄｾ･ C' ..;I- '1'1' v ｾ ..... of our exposition. _ ｾ for we need to emI b<1size at once the l""[tdically a i.-.·,. e H ｌｾｽＮｃＺ［ ｳｴ｡ｾＩ･ ｣ﾷｾＮＯ I .., 1'""d II '1J-J r ｶｾＮ o·t \.-',. ll-- !:Ill t t.A character of the problems fac'ng Husserl'J 0.nd th:.. t whGlJ. "'(2 Qsk after tbE'; pos,'5.bj.lity of a Ｉｾｩｲ［ｏｬＧｌｴｅ Sc;icnC6 9 'He aI:'(:3 e.sklng after somct.htI1f-, y,1holly nevI, for a possibili ty \<ihose Dature of:d contour remains c- ,':, :ret unclG[.ol,r' " 'Phi:: :Leaves a pre 1. imtnc:uy e,X pas i tion of the per.>:." .. ibl1ity of a. rigorous Science of Being with a necess.ary H C0 1'e H (If points (lu·" un:intel:Ligibll:l.ty· and opaclty", As Engen F"ink in hie brillio.nt article entitlGd liThe Pheno ..· Ii10ilolof.'; leal Ph llosopby of hUmund Bus ser'l a -Id Contell1por'a:ey 20. .from the very start phenomenology ca!ries with it a eertain " un i.ntelligibilit y " precisely because it cannot, in principle, be Rrasped With reference to the mundane problems, with reference, that is, to ｱｵ･ｾｴｩｯｮｳ which stand Ii-hin the horizon of the tlnatural attitwie ll • Its basic problem is concealled in this 1UY; it is at first not an ｵｮｳ｡ｴ ｬｩｮｾ problem \vb i.e h is samahovl pI' e sen 1 ｾｦｯＮＭｲｊＲ ph8nomenolog ical theory, 5' that by virtue of its threatening character it can serve to provoke philosophical reflection. It first originates g.s_ 3..=Rro1,?lCJYl in cmd thro ｾｨ tbe o 0 ｙＧ｜ＩＮ Ｍ ｉｴＢ Ｇｬｲ ＮｬＢ ＧｉｮＬｾ ｲＮ Ｑ Ｂ ＧｎＭ｜ｮＮｾＧ 1-""" A' V "v u v .:.. theirs ::, .•. '- c>. J.. ｾＬＮ ａ .L •• ｟ ｾ t: v. U', (.. J.., ｬｾ .. .-..,..·lP ..l. '.. ,:;, tJ.l. ......... J. V U ... ＭＧＢ ﾷＱＭ ｾ WI! C [1 ｡ｾＧｾＭＧ .!-: .L::; step to be taken in mastering it. .t..l eo. U"'y 31 Thus the difficulty: we cunnot enter the problem horizon ｵｮＨＺｬＮｾｷ of phenomenoloe;y 'Iv i t.hol1.t fir s' an.d !\\'lhQre to entel,tt ｾ stand Lng but bo-'-;h of oncE.: this ent",rance hetS a1 '92.jy 00.C ｴ｢･ｾ ul'cd Itho1d to enter tt only become evident Phcn ,mellology ｾ 0 a hl':f. 52. on v!hj ch is not open to us unless \'18 h&.ve already ology He 01,·t;. \0") .... . ) - ')I the lUU:;t D. preli.mtna1."y expo- toX' the full un..'iG:rstandi.nrr of the pi.:'e'blcma.t:Lc of ｰ｢･ｮｯｬＮＱ･ｮｯｬＨＩｾｪ ｳ｣ｾ ｮ "emain content \·?:i.th cal phllo·-.;ophy of Edmund Huss01'l t1-wougb that ｩｾ only fm' only tbr'oL1.gh tbe /j18thod ｰｨｩｊＮＨＩｳｯｽＡｨｹｾ of that ph i.losophy Lc: thD t pX' oblcE, -hol' :l?on or·e.i1("1fl"" 1£1., Ono canr:.o"C app:copr'iato tbp. esserltlEJl nCi.ture of phRl1oll':onolop;y L:UJt i1 one has ｾｲＸＮｳｰＸ､ 131d perfOrilit::d tts methodolog :Leal secUJ'inr; of iJs problGill=hoJ'lz,o!1 tbe J: '!c.uetio.n H ) r'Ld ODe ca.llllOt, ＨｩＢ･Ｌ ｾ until one has l!donc fully Grasp the nature of this meth/xl until the n8 tUI'e of 'phenomenolof::Y has been grasped ｾ It remains Itclosedlt to us if we remain outside of it, for It creates for itself its ttopennesslt Hithin \vhich its QI'1n problems and solutions occur e This once again reiterate. the necessity of the equivocations mentioned above. Phenomenology, according to Hu sse r 1, ｭＡｬ ＮＭｊＲｾｅｌｩ Ｎｾｃ Ｙ 32 r ｑＮＴｾｌｊＳ c i e.n.S: e. • \tJ e nee to ke e p J_n mind that Ive must USG the word nScience" here in a v-JhoJe ne,,·} ::'?'£Ls?,. PhA110m811ol.ogy cannot be a science Uamong others tl of tbe natural sort, 33 £')1" to be ｡ｭｯｮｾ them :L<" to share in the unexpli.cit, 1 idden hOl'izon of their )_t ].8 to share in their presupposing of tho end.B£fVOlJJ'S (:.:Js. s to make e:x_pl tcit ｾ bl') dependent upon them is to (-t 'd' CO"l" ('OJ'' '"\ c· .\. .............. Ｎｾ I t:.<.-'o.t Aj·) t t.empt ing l.o d ｩｾ［ｲＮＺｯｶ･ｬＧ of thci.1.' ths eXistence of thfj world, left unqLwsttoned mono logy is a d.empt ｩｮ［ｾ J"l' .;U \')!' .J,.U ｾＮｲｯｵｮ､Ｎ ｰｉＧｯ｢ｬｇｭＳＮｴｩ｣ｾ ｾ subject to UHJir m.ot ｾ｡ｶＮﾷ ｊｾｩＩｬＮＱ｡ｩｮ II 1,) ｾｊ G ,... ｾＬ 'l' " t.:> , It);q '1' t"l . ••• <:' .;>. • • Phenomenology must t ｴｨｾ is, to their modes b/ means 0 f phenOLlt'fl logyo but n18l'ely that tb:".s groand of phel...iJwnolot;lcaJ. pl')ilosophy as a rigorous Sci9nce falls within ｲｾ ｶ･ＸＮＱ･｣ to tt and. by it 0 ｐｨ｣ｮｯｴ･ｬｦｾｻ ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹ and is tbus dist inr-;u:1.sbes itself from the sciencss of the world fer these Jatter sciences do not and cannot concern themselves with thoir O\'1n possibU.itj" (i<lG., their ground falls outside of their 22. problem-sphere)" \'Je must say, therefore, that \vhi.le the se ience s of tbe vl0r1d ut i1 ize methods \<Jh ieh .J2.r...e Stll!DQ...§§. the ground of their endeavours, phenomenol.ogy must be in possession of a method vlhich its ovm ｾＮ ｑｊｉｕ＿｀Ｎ ﾧ ＲｑＮﾧ ｾ､ｮｵｯｲｧ must remain independent of science ｹｾｯｬ ｮ･ｭｯｮ Ｎｐ and worldly experience. But we need to emphasize that this does not mean that phenomenology is concerned with something e:x;..9•..lLs)ve of se lance and \'JQrldly experience. It is , rather, .. t" lor ',neHt 't']" 1I • pOSSln.l·cy thoLe urdtarv" ground, .8. It ,-,ee l s, as ground ｰｨｩｬｯｾＺ［ｯｰｨ " to r(:3veA.l I 1'l11icb v·orldly ｦｏｬｾ ＨＮｾ ｸｰ･ｲｩ ｮ｣･ and science have no c nccrno Th8refora, none of ',he methods or 0onclusions of Dat ral science can jl atify the Science of phenomenolog:J"" 11' t.! is d:Ld. oec not claim a ｾ･｣ｮ ｨ !J1,j ｾ ｰｨ･ｮｯｴｬ｜ｾｩＱＰ ｯｇｙ .Jot clRim, yet alone attain, the statns of a ｓｃｩｅｈＱｃｾ oi: 13ejnge It is .i.n reason that phenomenoloc:;v by \-)8 .i11rVi Ｓ｣Ｚｌ･ｮ｣ｰｾ bee;:1 n. Ｂ ＬＭＮｾ ｟Ｍ (,f thA scioneer. .d" Vie have ｰｨ･ｮｯｭＰｮｯｬ ｾｹ ITll1st must ma:Ln ,::3.1.n 111VJt 1 of 1:J€ and fot' destj.tute of sctcnt:Lftc kT10'i'JloClgC" ｢ＨｾｪＮｮ･［ could. bo called an ....--. :LneJ indc _!lsi'.'e _ ..... ..-._.............. _ .._:::..J.:)ondcl1ce ........-.._ ..... '.VOl..' SC1.ISr:'! hG[tx'd Russerl say that Phenc1wenO: ..Of.':Y as 3. ric;orolls of the could grasp of :Lt,c; ovm 8ffo:cts c).nd ｳｯｬｦﾷｾ［ｪＱＧｴｲｩＮｮｧ ｾＺｵｯ｣ rlgol'ous 11', ｳ･ ｮｾ 11O\'J, that the nature and poss i bil tty are very difficult to Grasp" For phenomenology to be possj.ble, a methodological b.ccess into its sphere of problems is requiredo Yet the ground of the possibility of phenomenology must fall within phenomenologyo We cannot understand this posstbility tf we remain of that HOlll,sldetl possibility. If the ground for the possibility of phenomenology did not .1.0.11 II inside" of phenomenology's compass, it could not claim to be a ｓｾＺｩ 1." i';(H'oll.S t'lOce;. for then it v.]QllJ/ not have "pas se S3 ion of its min abso1u.te ground II; this iI' '; OCYI ｾ -' Ｎｪｾ ./\''''''' of solf lUAstion- ｾ｡ｲｳ reason for his dissatisfaction With these ｰｲｾ｣ｩｾ･ need not he ､ＸｴＦｾｩｴｳ･ｶｮｪ in the present MJre ｣ｏｄｴ･ｸｴｾ ｬｾｯｵ､ :Lmportarlt to us is some :i JE>lf,ht intc '\,1h t Husge '-, as sat:l sfacto:ey .. Pe tEl:n.$ Uf; that I am ＸＱ｢ｩｾｭｬ .astec1 ｳｾｵ､ｩ･ｳ coun+- fCJ.t' ｾ to Ij;va in tx'u.th and. veraeitYe I have of' thG t01:'lll n n'l,s of obsenl'i.ty a 1d clolJ.bt \;118.\'\::1 I 8.W toSSt!Cl abou.t :In overy dLrect.., ｅ［ｴｊｦＮ ｬｃｾｩＺＧＡｄｴｬＺｦ ion. I mast acbsiv€ internal coherence. . 0 35 .ced: I have bfJCn throu.gl ,nough torments 0 "from lac k of c lfll']. ty a.nd fl'om dOl).bt that W1VAr s back and forth ｾ " t' _ Only one nGed abS01')S me: I must \4 in (J clarity, else I cannot live; I cannot bear life unless I can beleive that I shall acbeiv8 ito 36 In 1919, i,n an immensely revealing letter to Arnold Hetzger, a younger contemporary of Husserl's, (who disagreed with Russerl t s "shtft" from the " re o.lisru H of the ｈｵｳ ･ｬｾ 11'sh ft.!Y which allo\'JGd t ＱＲｧｴＨｬﾣ Ｎ ｊＺＮｩｬ ｌｾﾧｊ ＺｌＭ overcomo the disillusion felt in the first docade of the century!), we pGrsonaJ. need ･ｂｾ this ｲｴＳｾ｡ｦ ｩｲｭ･､Ｚ I <:.aI1 only tld.nk that yon have sensed somE:: of the sus'Guini,ng etlos tbrougli the laconic sohriety and ｳｾｲｬ｣ｴ concentrati0n on tha mntters at hand in my vE' it ｩＮｾＺＢＧ ｳＮ You must hene SG11Scd that th is ethos is -.,8.LJ•.")"; ,.,.., m,l\r·'·· . . . I., Bw :>r( H)J."il -,<:! • ｧＬＮｾｮ .,..' .i.l,tl,,1, bｬｾＧ ',J. f:'.. Ｎ＾ｾｬｉ.,ｊ . "8 ') JU;) a.1.e, Ｌｾ ｾＮ ,I. . . . .ｾ ." .\.1 0ｾ uc. ", 1 ') D.L Ollt oj: a ｣ｯｭｰＩｾＮＺ ":::I 1,.{):> 1'7 ｾ.L ｾ｟Ｌ Ｇ p. 1 0 1 s 1"1 C 10._ deGC1'j Le colla!"lse in \<1b i h tbe only' hope is an cmtLrel,: nmJ life, a despnrate, ｵｮ［ｲｴﾷ､Ｎｬ ｾ ine; 1'0801ut5.on to beg).D ｦｲｏＡｾＱ trw bet;inninc and to go fort1 :1..tJ l'ad iea 1 hone sty 9 come vJhat Yllc1y" 'l')rv'.'L..,-,1 '.J,n i ｾＮ (\ U t'J t;I..., " ll. .I..I , ·0.1. ) ｾ ｾv f.l . "" Cl .:TJt'1.,llu ',- ("> 37 38 It i" cleal' that tf i-J8 allc.fvJ th<:1 need Sc:JenCE: of B3ing to rest upon the of ons partj,C' ulc:u" .f 'c"']'" , r. e. 9 ｾ :\n fact <\ hOlU3D i.l- ｰｳｹ｣ｨｻＩｬｯｾｩ ｡ｬ necess:tty beinG, tho. t it somuhoH loses its J.OS(-;5 by thus adw:l.t t lng i tf3 de ｰｯｮ､･ Ｈｾ Ｉ ｣ｪｲ｣ｵｭＸｴ｡ｮ｣･ｾ fo!' a 1" igol'oUS its 'v'ery cbaracter as r ieorous? on cont ｩｮ｛［Ｈｾｮｴ ｰＵｹ｣ｨｾ 10,<:: teal The need for a rjGorous 8cioDce and full goes deeper thRn ｴｨｩｳｾ We have spoken ahove about the ideal of philosophy as ded:Lcat:Lnr:: 5,tself tmva:C'cis c:;,osolute Lnc'/vJlc:d;:;e B $ 'l.r e gOHl of " pure Flnd The attempt to find t.his InKY\:JlE:.dge is ｰｨｩｊＮｯｾ is called by Husserl the "htstorical purpose" of sophYe Yet if we survey the history of philosophy, this purpose and a dedication to it leaves uS feeling somehow empty and unfulfil' ed., Hany philosophers before HusserJ. have ｦｾｱｩｉｾ to fulf'll this ideal. Is it not ｭ･ｾ naivety ideal of nhilosonhv _. ｾ by we iI, ho are so auare of in tbo present age, lt18 j. ts J." constant fail uJ'e? Here 9 are left witb an ｴｊＺｬｳｾ｣ ＺＮｑｴｪ ｣ｪ＿Ｌｬｾ｟ Ｎｾｬｉ＿ｪ . cjJ:llil as to 'he possibility and even the necessity of philosophy. We ar I ... left with it: • !l' :Lf his -.o...· y has r <:"")""')(";" rlJ -1'h lJ ,"., v! 0.1 . .ｾ［ ,.., . ｾ Ｈ " t·' " I c.' •O.l' C,'l)...... !. .lO.l", ｮｾ .:..J that 23ai.n sC.ms -:; and ｜ＡｾＧＱﾷ［Ｎｾ of' ..I. )1', LJ f; . .. :.hll1C to us than that ｴｾ［｡Ｈ ｨ a]'l th'" ｾＮｦ . n01J!k> upon 1..J 1ＱｴｾＮ Ｑ '".. , ma::! .r G."1. 'I/:-; (> ｾ foe m a nil :11 S sol i! e t be UJ <; E:"<l. V e s 1 i k 0 f 1 e Gtｾｮ＿ !aves;. t1Jat it <l:t.ltw.ys 1,.]8,s nnd eve.l I'ltD, be so, cl. ,I ｃＢＩｊ Ｇｮ ﾷ｜ ｉＮＱ ＧｾﾷＱ ·.1 .... 'J "\ (_.... 'j'';''. ..,dO ｾ '.1 .J. ..\' ｬＬＨ ｾ｡ＬＺＮ ［Ｚ'Ｇ £,1 -::; ｾ t· "':--'1,.. '1 ,. T'l()7"l-4 \.. ;., ｾ .... u ｾ OJ:1 ".Dr \j t 1 - Q • turn into non:)an w? console o111'selver; "'1:Lth th::J.t? Call \Jle live :i,n thi.,c: Ivorld v!bel'8 h:istol'tcal ＨＩｾ･ｬＮ ｲ･ｮ｣ＨＩ is nothillg blrt an mending concatention of illusory progress and bitter dissappointment? ｡ｄｾ ｡ｾ ｩｮ bE: inz renson lnto ｭｌＺＮｾ･ｲｹ ｭｾｳｴ ｾ ｾﾷｏ What is lost, in the face of this vague ｳｾ･ｰｴｩｾ cism 's the faith in the possibility of Raason attaining 'Truths. a los:;; of' Ｎｲ｣ｾｊ ｴｬＱ in the possibili.ty of attaird..ng l)y r'ot'L'lr:.ct-i . v ＮＱｾ on ＭｾＮ 5' Lhis historical factual ,hat GVGI'Y c:.-J't'OJ:t to attain meallj.l1gfnlness is doomed to evontual faj.lure, dOOMed, that is, to be turned into ovent.ual ｮｑ ＺＳＰｮｳ･ｾ Yet tbis sce-pticism does not quell domand and need to ralse the .c 0110\<1 ｩ ｮ ｾ questions an€l\.,l and 39 meaningless? Is the world essentially unintelligible? What can we do, now, in the face of this scepticism as to the possibility of attaining meaningfulness? What can wo do as when faced by the possibility ｰｨｩｬｯｳ ｰｨ･ｲｾ of the impossibility of phil r sophy itseJ.f as a search for meaning? Husserl asks: Can we simply ra'urn aeain to the interuptad vocat .o1al 'i'l rk. on OUJ:' ovm 'Iphilosophical problems lt , that is, each to tbe further continna U.O 1 of his OvJn I1h ilo30phy'? Can vJ8 ser ionsly do toa t 'Jhen it ｳｾ･ｭｳ certain that our ｾ｝ｩｬｯｳ ＹｨｹＬ like that of a lour fallow philosophers, pAst and prese t, 1\111J. have its fl'3Atinc Ｈ ｾｩｙ of ex:Lsten(;a nly among the flo:ea of eve:cy ｾｲｭＧｊ I.ng and Elvc:?r dying ph ｩＮｬｯｾ soph:i.cs'? Procisely heroin 11as 0 y plight -- the pliGht , I" ｉｾ 1. . . H. ,i'/' j.. Ｑｾﾷ "'f v ·ii',.." \'. L V ｾ -.,' .- ｾ ':.,ｾ 1 Jr·ｾＬ t \ J::> ifJ () 0 c;;,.l £·····llC..,-l·(.>'; "-}-", {J.L. c-, lo ,,'s. bv' '" L.J ｾ .",' -. "i'! C ;0" 01). 1· "L l'1 tv p.1ＬｾＮＧ _\" 1]. C do . Ｇｉｾ｢Ｂｌｬ .... ,/'-'n\'·;·'(.> <> ' h " to!.!." l, i_ , 1h 1.:• .£ ;:;; 0'" .J. ｾＬ ｜Ｎｊ Ｚ ＾Ｇ Ｂ Ｇ Ｎ Ｉ Ｇ Ｎ Ｉ ｾ Ｂ <:I. U1G n'flo. t');'lS!:;" 1 tve i'm' truth ｾ:t wbo onl 'J.r in t1-:J ts \,18y' ,U'O ｡Ｎｾｬ､ soe k: to hG iIi Oi)'(' (J';)n Ｂｨｾﾷｲ｜ＧＮｴ B··,t 1:1Iil1ilosorl1']Y',3 of ｴＧｾｬｮ ｰＺｴＧｾｓＰｴｬ \}(l bnv0 :['311611 :Ll1to a i ni'l:tl ＸｘＺＮｪＬｾＳｴＰｮ ＵＮ［ ｊＬ ｃＰＱＢｇＡＧｈ ｾＮｩｃ l' jon c ＧｾＨｬ･ fa j.th in ｙＩｃＭ Ｈｾｳｻ｢ＬＩＧｈｴｾＬＮ of nhl'J()':'O,)11V riC" a ')'<:!r'k t'ha'\' j<" t 'r'e 1... 1 .J ｾＮ t-Y ... .i.- • "-" L f t/ C_ ｾ Vet .1 .. _ ? ...,",\.0' ｾ I ｾ • va \.J..,. I ..... i) the 1)os.::::ibtli.ty of universal. lCl1oHlocL:e" is ｾ［ ｑｲｬｇＧﾭ th inC?: c<tnnot let go ( h' (:\ knoitJ that I'le" are ca11,cd .1\. j at' ,,1.. Ｌｾ 1,') .. S" . , .. " Pl.J. h "L 0'.01"\1'Je.,::,. fA':;:) J . ..,0 -I-vtl • .:.> u. •.ｾ｟ＮＧｬ＾ l·Il.OU'J "j"')"j, yCt.., hot.-! do \-J8 holc) on to this be 1 5. o.f ｾ llhich has 1TI8aning He <:' only i'1 to us ｡ｬ ｾ • "I' '" to t'ilC sin'Z10 ｾ［ｯ｡ｬｾ Hhich ts comlnOll ti)at is phtlc':'30phy as such'? l'olatj.Oll 1.\·1 How are we to ｢ｾ able to hold on to this . 1· 1T.Y . . O.t"' ptu.LOSOp,1y. t· 1 '? poss 1.. b 1. ,'loy T·'. • ].S .t 116 elicf in the h 0 1..:l· .,..d.ng 0.f' t ..1) l ' S b e.l ' 1.61,.. To anm·,1er thls ｾ J.ot ns ｦｯｲｦｾｩｴ ｮｧ r'C\lGl'S8 our fi)'st qnestion [)nd ask il\'1hat does the of this balisf in the possibility of philosophy entu.LL?!1 It demand;:; a ｦｏｉＧｾｩ tins; of the belief' 1n the pass ... ibility of Reason attaining Truth. Y t doesn't the ne d to maintain this belief carry with it a tone of a somewhat neurotic need for omniscience and consolat ion j.n the face of absu.l'd ·ty? Hussf:p.'l most certainly does not 'V1ish to fH.ll into this cateGorYG FIe does not 'I'lisb to devise Hgr<-J.nd systE:Jm H to resolve of Pure Ｘｔｽｾ＼ｦ all di.fficnltles "under thEJ detached nnd u ｒ･｡ｳｯｮｦｬｾ ollnisient SO.\18 Ａ｣ｯｮｾｲ･､ with our personal existential needs. He asks himself: Is it not the case that what we have presented here is something rather inappropriate to our ｴｩｭｾＬ ｾｮ ｡ｴＮ Ｈｾｭｰｴ to rescue tb(-) honour of rationalism ｾ of fI ･ ｮ ｌ ｩ Ｎ ｲ ｾ ｨ ｴ ･ ｮ ｲ ･ ｮ ｴ it of an ints 11octlJ.8.1 isw 1>:hich ｳＮ･Ｓｾｏｬ Ｇｬ ･ｳｴＮｾ iL tbeor:Le S 8.1 .enated fu.>m the \40i:' Id ｾ "'I,J itb its nocessary evil consequences of a superficial l.ust for 81:'udo.-c,:l.on and ＺｩｬＱｴＨｾＱＮ ･ｇｴｵ｡ＱｩｳｴＮｩ ｣ Srlobbtsm'? Docs this not mean that we are lead again ｢･ＱＰｾ 11tO tV; fatGfD.J. errOl" oJ' bGLLevin;!, thwt sc:1.enc6 <:<3.n nwi<:8 .·.',r,"· ,'+ r'J,I:"... ·,c.'t;!:l"lc·' c"ea"e ,., ｨｾＧｦ',<:.l Ｂ :DCl •'11.':j;.): • __ "'-,,,j \••• ｬＮ Ｚ＾ｾＬ \',,(,:'ll, 1.v J'''''' Ｎｾ ,.I•. h,,l "0 L. '. L,' Crt •.l!.J.l. !:. ＧcｲＮｾ ... .•. cl. r'U"l'lrH" ... ｬ ｾ ｣ Ｚ ＾ ､ Ｑ Ｇ ｬ ｴ Ｍ ｉ ｙ Ｂ Ｇ ｲ ｾ Ｑ i"p' +"1'--'+ l' c.' ,A0s·c(.:lr ,.. ,f' 'j .;. t" ';""::1' (-') v ｟ｾ ｶﾷｾ 1. \. .I. Vet. ｾｬＧ l ｾ ｾ ..... v.... aL. v J...,. ..J '\J" \, hlJO HOu1.cl still ta kG sucb J.l(;J. II t ions ,." J... 1..... S8:C ｩ ｯ ｵ ｾ Ｌ # ly today? 1+2 If He \'Jish to avoid, 'I:lith Hnsserl, [mel! an \'ll1at can ilDk of \';8 ｾｴｩｄ ＼ｾＱＮ ｯ｣ｴｮ｡Ｎｬ ｳ｛ＺｮｬｴＬ lu'selves as phj.] csoi.!l·lers thr,l,t 1-'..'1.11 8.V(.i:5. tho embarassement and naive dishonesty of the desire for FJ. perfect, ｦｩｮ ｳｨ･､ｾ Rational idea of phlloso ihy as a ｬＧｩｾｯｲｳ SySt,8W? HOh! is it that tho ScJ.ence of Being call "';ithsL:wd the effec:'G 01' an l1is"l,oI':l.cal sc:cptieis'.n as to H;s ＱＬｏ Ｚｾｳｩ｢ＺｌｕＬｴｹ＿ fO::.l.e6. ｾｻ･ ､ｮｾ｛ neBd to examine mo e closely \'Jllat is fol'- thereby v.'hal: can bG mal.tained ",n the face of such an encounter4 Russerl gives us a clue as to what needs to be forfoited with the giVing up of onels faith in the possibility of philosophy as Science .. ie tells us that: Along "Lith this falls tb, fai th in Il a bsolute rcason tt through which the world has its meaning, the faith in t 1. meaning of hi.story ｾ O.r humanity, the faith in mans freedom, th t is, his capacitJ to secure rational meaning for his individual and ｣ｯｾ ｯｮ human extstonc8o If man loses this f'C).ith, it lileans nothing les s than the 1035 of fa i th II in h imself" ｾ in his ovm true being .. 43 But to avo id th is It falter 1ng of ro, ith" does not invol VB, for Husser'l, v :LOi'! 111g mans trne be :Lng as one of a per feet .y rational creature, devoid of concern, devoid of chanee and Russerl goes on to say that: ｳｴｲｩｶｪＮｮｾＮ This true being ls no": something ｨＨｾ always as, ::i,th t;le ＺＳｈＺｕＧＬ ｾｶｩ､｣ｮ ｡ of th9 hI ｡ｭｬｴｾ bnt flomeｴｨｩｲＬｾ he ｯｲｊｾＺＯ ｮＺｾＬＧＳ Fwd ean hove hi i..h8 form at the ｳｴＮｊＺｵｾ［ Ｚ ＱＰ ｦｃｪＺｾ ｨＺｬｾ ｴｊＧｵ ｾｨ the s'cruC;f;le to lu{drc ｨｾＧＮｊｮＭ ＼Ｇｅｾｬｴｮ ..... .t·'r''':'l Ｇ｢ｾＺｖ｜ｮ C"J..','t. . .J"-c. Ｇｾｬ ｮ｜Ｇｪ ･ ｜Ｂ rc", c..d . \..-- l'O'Er' ." ｶｾ l ' • . •ｾＱﾷＧｉｴＢ .l ... C . ::>, G' -1..)v••.lc:. OlL!L .SOc"1 y 0 a. '\'·1\' <j t . l,G. ｣ｾｳＬ ｾ ' C__,' 'j U1"CLtSCJ[L H oJ! ._._'•. O{,j:: t.:enlA C}.r ＭｾＮ｟ＭＢＬ :"', "1 L. h,.l.I..,l·.g 'j... 00'1." I ' '. .', 1'" <0 t 1,.., ｾ 0$> ｾ ｾ Lt·l.· ' .:" 1 ｾｉ､ /... ｾ ｾ ......',('l1<.l.. 'J reo • f.lec ' i-J.l.on, ,'. i c _;;> ｯｬＬｾ｜ＮＬ｡ the poss.ibiljty of lr..aintaini[,g fEd.tb in ｾｩ flna1 7 definitive and 1'i.n:l.E,hp(l. sys tern. of li bso 1 U. te Knml] led.ge ｾ p·r'.>'"p o{:' c-.. 0 .1.. ｾＮ ＱｴＡＨ ｾＧ ｜ 0 ｾ＼ＺＧ (,_.:> :;;;. ｾｩ A\hc.·ol·)·t" Kl'lo·JG:.r ..J • • ｬＮｾ It.; \.. /\,.o • ｭ･｛［Ｎｮｾ is thflt i'Jl1:lc:b 58 evident (by Lr , spiri tual lt n "'11 ｾ ｫＭＧＬｊ ｾ 'l'i 11 a ｑｌｪＬＧＮｴｾｵ ｨ｟ '1· Yet what is not lost of 2,n ｾﾷｬ｡｣ｪｲｯｴｳｩｨｕ as opposed to histol'iea,I-factual reAd.Lng of as Idea every ｵｮ､･ｲｬｩ｡ｾ '\J fully In the 0 SO'" C LA..1. " , 1.';l-... ｟ｾｬ s v l' C>• ,.,.. ..... II is .. ,",' c. •.) ｾ Ｇｾ .L.: .. ...,t to be an' po.ssing a\.;av- of ｴｨｦｾ t need not La lo[;t to us as philo.:;ophors is t.he anci the inher(:'nt val idi ty it as an infinite, id\?8.1 go Ｑｾ f the to \<l!)ich V.le ｧｊｾＮｩＲ ＮｭＲＱ ｧｑＮｾｌ to ct t ta:Ln are lJlinded by an r)9 l- histor cal-factual reading of the hist ry of philosophy. To maintain the possibility and necessity of the a tt9!Iill.t....to_l:§1-?_Clh Tr u.th is to maintain faith in man r:imse If, faith in manls life as assenti lly a directedness ｴｯｾ｡ｲ､ｳ Truthe The question of the meanin3fulness of this life is not one that is capable of a final answer with which we may rest. BDt it does alloH for the possibility and ｣ｯｮｴ｣ｬ ｴｾ This, for HusserI, is the necessity of rasing the question of the possibility of a rig rous Science of Being. It raises ,nee the question of the posstbillty of LOans life as at '"'nl'r:"<0iY f'11 9all' me ｾ '" 1 <',l U J;:., • ",,[,)"l""l') v• • ｾＮ ｾＧＮＬ ｊ _ J ... ,:<, 111)-' ｟ｾＮ ">c"m: n, ＱＮ｟ ＼ＺＩｾＬ ＺＢｇＮＬ Ｇ ｾｲ Ｑｬ ｵＧｦｾＨＭＩＧｬ ｉｾＢ "h;('h it ＬｬＮｾ ,1"", lwd 8:cc.ho nc:e niS of' D.eason ilnd i.s 1 i'led ffi0a,L lq::fully ｊＮｪ｟ｾＷ･ｳ under thsso It is in thiJ sense that we can ｉ､ＰｾｬｳＮ Sf-eal<: of an ltethic.s of ｰ｢･ｮｯｲ ･ｮｯｬ ｳｹｬｾＬ for ｩｴｾＬ t sk is not an empty philosophical GccentrJcity, but rather an ti 6 it 0't'll.' C Ct.... -,> "I L ＢｾＮ V aloof and t "L ':. OIY' " "7 t;} r__ v ... \ e d "'1 v '8. l"j('ll\ ､｟ＮｾＬ osL1'aet and 81' sOD.al concerns ｾ ｲＭｾ C I'OillO\led Tt _ do p. ..J 0C' 1-.r1"" ,G ｾＮｷｰｨ･ｬＧ ｬＧｾ l.l P.,J.l" e b"lj , remain fx'om the ,vorld o.r11 is ri-.1.ther pass tc\,nately d. ﾷｾＧＮ｜ｩ thCl.t world and tbe telos inherent in i ts '\>Jhola ｾ OtH' ct J1 to\olC.u·cls ｬｩｦ･ｾｩＺｬｯｶ･ｮｬﾷＳｮｴＮ cha1'acter .. Husscu'l tells us that we, as philo- ［＾ＧｾＨＱ s: 0" sonal [U'e l't;!S ｦ｜ＮｷｾＧｴ ｪｯｮｂ ｬ ･ｳ ponsｲＧｴＭｮｬ［ｯＭｲｩＺｬｯＭｔＧｹｴｾｩｉ｢ of ｭＺ ｽｮｬＧｾＱＮｮ｣ｌＬ The qu:lte perbe inf; as' ph ｾｯｬＮｪ \1(; sopher S '; our lnner pel' sona 1 vocat ion? bear S Vi ith in itself at the same time the responsibility for the true bci.Ds of i11anl{i,nd; t1: e lHtter is, 'lGcessClI'ily, ｾ 30" being toward a telos, and can only come to realization, if at all through philosophy -- through if we 2re philosophers in all seriousness The r.Q.?-J:•Ｎｴｾ＿ｪｑｬｌＺＡｽｩｳ 9 e 5, 0" 1+7 telo§. (vlhlch Husserl feels is 1n- herent in the history of philosophy as ｉ､ｾ｡Ｉ need not be It ft..§. te}os,. HU3serl ' s task is more a matter of putting h5msel on the '."ay to philosophy ｾ of making a beginnj,ng toward the infinite goal, of Truth. This task therefore, ｩｳｾ a realizing on the part of man of his true being as a a the ph ilo:::orhe r mu s t ｡ｨﾷＺｹＮｾ［ d(-3vote h imss If to m8.sL,s.!"i.ng t'19 tru'3 3.::d I'u] 1 sense of philoscpby 9 0 tho totalit.,i of thls ho:c-izon of jrlfi.nityo Ko 1:i,ne of ｫｾｭＩｬ･ｊｬ･ｾ no ｳｩｮｾｬｦ truth may be absolutized (:1)• .:1 i. ＮＳＨＬＱｴｦＭ［ｾ Only ｴｨＱＢ Ｉ ｬＮｾＱ this hi;::,hr-;st fOr'li1 of C'J])' Ｂ｣ｴ Ｇｾｉ Ｇ ｬ Ｇ ＩｓｊＭＧＨＩＡ Ｇ ＼ ,>t:: .•. • "\J ＮＧＺＬＡＮｾＬ Ｎ v'".' A'">.:.,, ·t.J'[liC·· v •. tl the bl":tiCl'lCS of th:} Ｑｮｦｬ ｾｌｴ･ ｬＧｊ ｳ･ＱＴｾ l ; , . ' .•. .1 Ｇ. ｩＩ･｣ｯＧｙＢ ｾ . . L;U...; ta.sk, can 0"'6 11· or> J, ｰｬＱ Ｎ ｴ ｯｾＩ ｮ＿ｾｹ 1J. ,tt.f> function of Ijuttir.g i'LsE;).l, and tbu.i'sby genuine hUfi1Ardty,; on the rOHl (to re8.1:i.zation)" (Tbs 8.1.-?<.:rct':2ss) the," t. 'ds is the c<!;,c i ｴｳｾｬｦ li elongs ＮｦｬＩ ＱＮｦｾ to tho domain of philosophical knowled7B at the lnvol or ｴｳ･ｨｾｩ self-roflection. ｾＬｬｹ ｴｨｲｯｵｾｨ its conste.nt r (I flexj ｾｊ ity ie R Vh ｹｨｰｯｾ ｬＮｊ uni vel' s[i1 knm'l:t ed g (; • ｾＬ［ｬ･ seo mol" e c 1081' ly nerd ｣ｲｾｮ Clt1.8stj on of be reacbed 48 ｬｾ th8 its o\-!n poss j hi-Ii ty th takeE; the fOl'm of ｂ･ｧＮＺｴｮ ｩ ｧＧｾ ｴｨｲｯｵｾｨ hOH rEd.s ir;g of fl. t'nG gc [\1 to the solf-criticism (f philosophy as to 0 Only hrough such <=l. radical sel ｦｾﾷ cr it ic 13J1.1 can ph '!,losophy avoid -h; false a bsolut1za t ion of 31.. Truth" Yet the necessity of this ｲｩｾｯｲ ｵｳ Science of Being is still one that remains unfamiliar and obscure, for tle sphere of questioning it aspires to is not one that falls i';itbin the compass of our ltnRtural attitude lt • vie stand, in a peen.liar this Science, as IVG ｳ･ｮｳ･ｾ stand ltout!"ide lt of the need for II out· Jde It of the true under stand ine of its nature and possibilityc It strikes us, from our natural attitude, not only as 'holly new and strange, but 1;9 as sumelloltl unmotivated and unnecessaryo Our vim·] of this Scienco\l before vie have entered tnto ":he sphere of its q estioning, easily beCOQ8S one of indifference if not repuls ｩｯｮｾ It seems t.o hold ont a ｾ a mere II :LntellecuaU. srl1 !l beyond recognition. And evan when it claims to be othor than this ｾ it tells us t.hat I'le are l1.na. ble to under ::lCaDel why it is different unloss we accept it wholly and ｾｮｴ･ｲ :Ln to it ｾ In fac :i.llg th ｪＮｾ s t8.nd ｴｬｾ･ Di:\ tur e d H'f lculty of cornlnf; to u!)der- and need for pl enomenology 9 Engen Fink tells us th:).t: ｂ･｣｡ｵｾ｣ jot', it is the susnonsion of tha natursl attitude c:c'U',not Clppe:'lI" \lithln t'I'i£j attit.n6.c 5 and tt thal'eforo must be lJllfcunjlj.9r. ThEl recluetion beeolilPs ..ﾷｾＯｬｭｮ able in its Ilt:':<:'nsc(mdontal mot iV8U.on ll o.nly VIi t.h t·I.!8 transcending of thE' 1,wt'JeL This n;.":1(.lns that the ｲｃ｣ｾ､ｬＱ｣ｴｩｯｮ is its own presupposition insofar ns it alone opens up ｾ｡ｨｴ dimensi.on of Dr 1blems With referonee to which it as ta bli ｾＩｨ･ s the ｰｯｾＺｳ ibll tty of a theoJ'Gt lea 1 .mo\'Jlodg<.:.: ｾ nlis strange pcHHclox of the be;:;:' nning of philosoph-i.cal reflection fjnds exnression \I),thin the fLU1damental v'rplexity into ｈｨｩＨｾｨ 0.11 attempts to 8xplicClte the tertI reduction fall ｾ Unmot-; iva ted and ｵｮﾷｾ ｰｨ･ｮｯｭｴｾｦＡｯｬ ｧ famLLiar \.;5th ｬｾ･ｳｰ･｣ｴ to its possJb'J.j,ty, lOwery explicRtion of the !)henomenoloeical reduction is in a unique way ｾ･ｳｬ｡ｦ This falsity is caused by the expo.s it ions ｾＧＡＮＹＱ ｾＮ､ J.Y__ ＬＮ･ＧｉｵＡｊ ﾣｐＮﾧＹ ｾＴＵ Ｎ Ｚ Ａｮ ｊｑＮＲ tha tis? its startj.ng upon the basis of the natural attitude, which the performance of the reduction is supposed to ｳｵ ｰｂｮ､ｾ Hence, the phenomenoloe;:icaJ. reduction appears ｦｨｾｳｴ to be OXle theory amon:; many 'il1hi ch in its own way answers to the philosophical problematic within v,lbich \,Jt'} already stand ".S rnetl phj l050phtzing in the face of the questionable natUJB of the world. In truth, hOvlever, ':Ie do not stand ,·,Iithin the pl.'oblemat ic of ph ilosopny '" " • from t'he ve.r:y start, but are :Ln a ra.dicnJ manner, outside of this problelIl13.tic" 50 Furthe -more, he goes on to say that: As long as vlS c:!xist \'J:i..tl:in the llatUl'al attitude the problem of philosophy, insofar as it is not factually alven, is not only ｵｮｦ｡ｭｩｬ ｡ｲｾ but also js indeed inacc0ss:.. bl'''. Bf'in'i shut off.' fr0ffi t.he dihJf.=l1sion of 'l,he trans::t:ll.derrLal )e Lon.7,s to ｴｨＨｾ essence nf thE.. ｴｮｰＱｩ ｮｯｳｾＧｊｰＱＡｬｩ 1,'" i.th j.n the HOI'l<:1 l;lh ich dof inos the flatu.rel u:ctJ.··.lJCE:c P"rJ'2!!101Jl81101oc::;/13 nroblem 5s net one Ｇ｜ｉＱＧｾｩ｣ｨ ec:.D be m;.plalnod vlithir t.lJG -:::ort:pas::; of the D3tural utti ,uds. 51 These from FInk carry us far beyoDi the present ｰ｡ｳ ｡ｾ･ contex and will therefore Deed to be recalled once we have more full.y introduced and expLi.e"tud HlJsserlian pbeDomenoloi;Yo They do, hO'dever, bl'j,ng u.s Itfull circle'·? back to the pI' oblem of.' 1t\!ber8 to begin" spharC'. ＱｾＧ･ SGe that \oJe 0 IIle [;lj'(j 'Lold that 'We cannot truJy begin lloutside" of ph 0 nOffit3flO 'ogy and. attempt to pcnet.'l.'ate into i. t by ,ome method that is fully j l.fti.fj,ed and undOlstood b:.foJ.'G that ｰ･ｮ｣ｴｲ｡ｴｩｯｮｾ By ｢ｾ ｩｮｧ of phe.ljOffienoloe;y, thus tlshut off t ! from thR pro'blemat.j.c ",18 ha.ve found anDlogolis tlcircularit:Les lt in all of our exposJtions as to the nature, possibil1ty and neces.'ity of pbenomenology. Again as v-lith its nature and \1/8 need say that, the necessity and ｰｯｳ ｩ｢ Ｎｬｩｴｹｾ motivation for phenomenology as a rigorous Science of Belng are only understandable in and. through pbenomeno.logy<> If its motivation and n8cessity vlere lloutsi,de lt of it (a.nd? hance, not clear to it), it could not claim to be a rieorous Science, 52 for it Jould remain dependent upon th1 motivatlon and determi.ned by ite The ･ｮｴｲ｡ｮＭｾ･ external tnto ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｾ oloeY is most assuredly taking on the character of a tl lI.l'eliglous conversion ! 5',_I 1-1"<.'1ny t:),0l\:S nOVJ face GXposj.·;.:;:ton ｕｓｾ 1:/8 to prGsent an ､･ｾｷ of' t'nG nature, method. and mat tl r of 1 tude. W8 ne8d to see b)w phelomenology is s)luti.ons of enter the:;. HUS8'?r1. ｾ ｰｨ･ｮＨＩｲＱ･ ｾｯｬ ｛［ｹＬ 81ld, ho1' 1zon? are prlo bJ.ems 1t of' Ho"J'sirle u ｬｊＧｾＬ ..... It.. .. t 1Ll..,.,c.' ..L ,.} ｭｏＺｃｇｯｶ･ｴＧｾ ":(-18 very net.::d ',0 .hat constant 1y raced towards which we have ｾｬｩｯｳｰｨｹ phl'10c;nr-j"'y at " .., ｾＮＭ Ｎｾ ... 1-' J" c:.1 us -ella t if \.] e 1"e rna 1.n (\ in a ｣ｯｮｳｵｮｾ｡ｴ｣､ hb';('clf ( \'Je can at least see that t'::is te.::::!c is not the mere proh8ntation of a \4Rl' ns ｰｨｾｮｯｉＺＱ･ｮｯｬ ｦＡＧｙ ｾｉ its Yet, Husserl ｴ｡ｳｫｾ outs i.dEI of i.t It ':J e \.] ill in the end on 1y hear wha t VIe \·Jan t, to heal'. II 54 ｜ｾ･ must pr eeed with caution and an acu' e sense of provj.sionalnesso We have seen thus far that the essence of phenomenology is difficult to grasp. We must now take the above noted considerattons and show ho\<-) they necessitate that phenomenology, as a r tgorous Scier'ce of Bei.ng, be a J)hi ｬｏＬｳｯｰｨｾ Husserl bore within himself an incessant passion for phenomenology and a faith in its Plospcct and scope, a faith Ｂ｜ｾ｢ＺｌＨ ｨ One could ｾ｡ｬＮｴ･ｲ ､ＮＬ neV8r 83[:; ily The f' llowing e;o a.s fal as to S9.y 55 tbt'l. t Pus set' 1 \-las seem to indicate ｰ｡ｳ ｡ｾ･ｳ lecture given in despj, te Hla.ny uphe&vDlst ｴｨｩｳｾ From a in 1917, we hoar Husserl saYI ｆｲ｣ｩｴｵｲｾ A rIG',-1 i'unc1[llnOf't;:d. ｳ｣ＱＸｮｾ 'J ptll:'G phonoJ;YHlolo?y 9 has developed Hithj n phi.losopby .. This :i.s <.1 .sCiE..t)Ce of & tborouehJ.y n.':''''] type end ｾＡｮ､ｬ･ｳＮＺ Ｌ ｓｃｯｐＨｾＢ It is ｩｮｾ feriar 'n ｄｾｴｨｯ､ ｬｯｾｬ｣｡ｬ rigor to nona of the modern ['Cienc8.). All phi.loso:,hj cal ､ｩＺＳＨＧｩｰｬＮｌｄｾＺｓ arc I'oot,0d in pure phenClJT.8no] 0GY', th.t'(Jl(::;b "I;lfJot,e dc'!veloDment awl t't,l'oli::;l, 1t alono ｴｨｅＡｾｲ obtain their fO)"cc" Ph:i.losopby is possible o.S Q r5,gox'ou::- ｣ｮＮｰｩｪｾ Clt aU _only through pure ｰｨｇｮｯｭ･ｮＰＱｯｾｙｄ 56 '\liS can see thi.s point put even filOI'e dogmD.tically in Hu.s:3erl! s 35 .. ally, in full admission of his faith in phenomenology, ｴＱ Ｎｨ･ｓＳｩｾｳ Husserl says that: t9--..9.§.....D1aintaiQ'2.d: All. rationally framr,d questions proposed to \{Dowled:;e as the '-Jork of reason are either trans cndental confused an1 absu.rd ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ questions or 58 ｱｵ･ｳｴｩｯｮｳｾｮ It is very difficult to not be immediately repulsed to some extent by ｛ｾ｡ｬｶ｡ｇ･､ by this attitude. It is onl.y our realization that this faith of Husserlis in phenomcnology j.s the product of .fifty years of' question':'ng that faith and put-lng it to the testo vJe need 110\'] of plJf.inomGnology be j lJ. 59 ask ourselves HFhat must the charncter orde.':." to cc'nf i :nn this fa ith'?u If to be it neads to be a ＬＳＱ｢ｩｳ ｯｾ tlw s L:; GO be me...:lr .'. a :i.ned is that ).f this is to be possiblA t-·le ｡ﾷｾｲ｡ｮｳ or lJ8Ve hEH-51y bogull our t::,xposi tton of EussQrJ.., condGntnl at t. j. t UG. ｾｬｃ im;narJenee tl 1s an term l! 111<..1.ny C'ontcx.ts ｴＮｮ｣ｾ i-I ｴＭｾ Ｑｰ･｣Ｎｩｃｬ ＱｊＮｹ ainb:LguollG ｴ･ｘＧｭｾ i th n;fwy m88.11 Ｚｾｧｮｩ outlines of what ｢ｲｯ｡ｾ･ ｴ etc. :,.;G shall find t.hat the ｷＰｾ ､ c In 1 ine useCl. i.n \oJ i th th is f' nd constitute a philosophy of IlI;;nanence e 1) 0 Phenoiil13nology must conta in :::l.llh)}1....ＮｊＱｑｾＺＱｩ of lts OH!l 11::ttLp.'e ｾ an under s tandint: for to leave this natuce l1.nqlwstioned and hot fully given to it 's to deny its Scientific characterc 36 .. Its essential nature cannot transcend its scope of understanding" This nature and an understanding of it must be i rrlJllill1 en t J;;J2.,_J;.t. ｾ 2)" Phenomenology mus t can ta tn tj>'9lf. the \'1 ＮｩＺ｟ｄｨ［ｬｌｾＡＮｪ ･ﾷｾｯｵｲＡ､ of i"ts own possj.biJ. ty, for to leave "Ghis gro·nd ullrevealad is to deny lts Sc:Lt::ntific Cil8.racter. Its eronnd cannot tran,scend it; it must be l.ts evealed by it and tlllJ.s be \'iithJn Phenomenology mus t be sa If- gi' oLmd ine.. The ｧｉＧ｡Ｎｾｰ Ｎ ground of i.ts possj.biltty must be imE0J1EJ.D."t.-..1Q_J.t., ｬｾ ＧＺＮｴｩﾷＧｳ･｣ ｮ £'0 ｯｾｩＧ 16:1v9 t.lat necess:tty u.nqU'sstio.1:1ed or' to adm:J.t its cxtorn,:tlity )3 to deny :its Sci,Htiflc cliarci.(·tE.H 1 c Its necessity must not transcend its scope. Its nec83sity and mo t i vat i 0 J.l mu;" t be )-1)" ｜ｾｩｴｨｊＮｬ ｴ｢ｬｾ ｬｲｩＮ＼Ｚｾｮ §\L:tL..I:-Q._tt" ｰｨＨｊｮｯｲ ｊＮﾷＺＧｮｯｬ ｾｹ scope of ,,1h:i.e 11 is ｊＮＺｻＳＭ ｪＬＺｌｃ Ｎｦｩｬ ＺｾｌＮｊｬｾＲＱ ｬｴｾＩ Ｎｊ ｩｌｴｧｽＬﾷＱＢ there CAn be notl)jrig Fot h :Lng ean fa J.]. of its 2YI1SP, for sueh a "t.r!-:\Dscenclence" \'JOul-l ､ｬｾｮｹ tI OLtts ｩ､Ｎｾ II the pos..,:i.b:Ll.it.yof' cert:J.i.n'ty and thcre\'lith deny- it::; Sciel1tific charactu!.'e It '8.l'.r;r ｭｵｳｴｾ with its character of inclusive illJlt_1 Ｚｕｾ＿ｑｉｊｾ sc:i.E.mces anJ ': orldl)T a l'Cl. ｴｨＨｾ som'CGS of justifi.cation of ·.11 It mw,t find loJ:Lthj.. n itself ･ｸｰ･ｲｪＮｻｾｮ｣･ｾ t tonally de tar min.:! ble cc smos; this to__ t 1,,, Horeover ｾ since ｩｮ､･ｰ｣ｮ､･ｮ｣･ｾ ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｦｬｯ ｾ ｹ cosmos mus t be l.mD.l8J)cnt a:.;pires to Science, t h :L S cos mo s mus t be 11Y l:.mnlill1Qn ｌｩＮｬｊＱｾ \'I h 0 5.Q.J.1" This lIpbllosophy of Immanence!!, then, o.110\l1s no SOU1'ces of justification to be Itoutsicle of itself " " And this t'Immanence" takcs on a peculiar ｣ｨ｡ｲ Ｎ｣ｴ･ｬｾ in that it is not able to allow the possibility of a radlca correlative nature 01 It is ｬ ｩＱ ｬＮｳｊｽ ･ｮ｣ｴｾＺｬ ﾣＮｾ ｢･｣｡ｵｾＬ･ of the Immanent phenomenology that our exposition bas run into so many d fficulti8s. We must now leave our preliminary expos ition of the phenOirl3flology of }td.mund Husser 1 1;1 i th yet another paradox: \<JH, cl,S s tancUng in the na tu.:e al at t i tude, had <lifficlll ty enter ing j of :Lts prob: no outsid0 t1 , ｐｨＨ［ＮｮｯｾＡＱ･ｮｯｬ ｗｩｔ .-....... ｟ｾ Ｎ｟ｾＮ _ _ . "....... ..ro .... ｾ｟ＦＮ｟ n to phenomenology? for ｜ｕｾ l'em::i.:Ln- Yet pl1enomclrwlagy "bas ･ｭｾｴｊＮ｣ . ｭｬｈｾｴ . ｾ . . . .00 :·th1.8 . .-_._.. _.to . . . _. __.find . . . '_ . ｾＮＬＮ ｟ＮＢｾＮ｟ ｾ Yi"l.th:Ln . - . . _.. . . . . . . . . II ｅｃｾｉ ｎａｈｬｴｊｉ ASCEl:3ION TO "You 'Vii'll never find the boundarJes of tbe soul, even if you follow every road; so deep is its ground lt .. Indeed, every Ｑｾ ｉＧｯｵｮ､ｬｴ ｾ ｾ • that is 7'08.(:1'1-· e points to fu.'ct.he._ ,,;.'counds, every horlzon opened up awakens new horizons, and yet the endless whole, in its j.ufjn:Lty of "'lo'.:Jing movement, is orient.ed. tmlards the unity of one Inan ing e ... 0 60 In the 'tPt'olClgomen8 to PurE; Log) c\ t.he ｉｲＩｏｅＧｾＬ d8./WC·'lj:OllS B.'i-:l.<Jt)[; e3. ti01l i'8.ult In toe of the $c::i :nco. is a D.Del a su bsc qucnt ﾣｾＺ ＩｦｬｽｊＳ ＺｌｮｶｯｳｴＺｩＮ ｾ｡ｴｩｯｮｳ of.' ｣ｯｮｦｵＺｾｩＱ t)f _ eve',.s of . .;h.QS.i,.....QJ:..fJ<Q1-<l;].o tho difficulties one encounters jn ｡ｴ ･ｭｰＧｩｮｾ he a ｣ｯｮｦｵｾｩ 1,311s uS<t hGV l2 f'c.)\u·..ﾷｾ､ ＺｩＮ ｲＩＧｖＨ［ｳｕＮｾ 62 In dtsc D. OJ sing to clarify and keep separuto the domains of l.ogic and psych01 ｓｵｾｨ 'ebB ｉｾｙＬ of lava13 or spheres of irvestigations, frlr reaching (38) ｣ｯｮｳ･ｱｬＱ ＧＭｈＱ｣ｯｓｾ lead:Ln.g to tho setting up of incorrect methods and goals for each scimc e. In fact, it is precisely this 61+ of the necessity ｲ･｡ｬｩｾ｡ｴＱｯｮ of keeping the spheres of logic ard psychology separate tha. lead Husserl to ro j ·:::ct the of Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ＬＭ ｾＭｾ ｾｲｩｴｨｭ｡ｴｩ｣ set forth in h' s Ph ＮｙｨｑｾＹＱｴ V:i.8\v s 65(1891) under the force of a critique of this ｆｲＨｾｧ･ \4ork by e This difficulty has a close affinity to the diffienlty we now face in a',tempting to discover the essential !>inny concepts tn the phenomenology of Edmltnd ｉｊ ｬ ｝ ｑＮｬ ｾｄＮｑ ｾＢ Husserl are used in many different contexts anj wj,th many ｑ ｾＧ ,·)'!' ·<>·'r,",'r.. .1#.1...L ",\" '-f':'" lS ..... 1(}f"' L.Jr:tC.l:.v'-) I< • .(' U.L 171'::l"'11111l:1'1l U ..... u .'_'.-:..' $ 'fhc>"r.'l Ll,\.v,"-, (1 4 '('·""""PJ1r·S" .1. v"". ".'. ,l•. v <lrJ..' ..srJ t:;. t. .. ly brouzht forth. With reference to this diffjcultJ, HUSS(H'l.J It is often said in this contextD D ｾｴｨ｡ the ､ｾｮﾭ ｭｴｵＺｾ b'1 avert-ceL, It :is to ｢ｅｩｾ F-"Cl' of' '7'f1l11 ' o<,,'I·)tiol ｩ［ＧＨ ｾｦ･Ｍ｡ ｨＶ｜ｾＸ［ ＭｩＺ ［ ＭｮＱＺ Ｌｾｴ ｨ･ｬＧＡＮｾ Jt ts r:ot a lilnttpJ_' of explieit eq\lj\70c8ttons, "hieh ;tre s!J.c:h ｴｾｨ on"i 8,.. ou1c1 or co',lJ.d, ｭｾｬＧ｡ ｹ follo\>i lll) tho \o)ords a.nd trw verbal ｾＱＩＧ｣＾ｱｲ ＪＢｾ ＺＮ ｾ ［ＧＮＺﾥｾ ＢｾＧＣＮ ［ｴｯ ql1l' f':-J" ［ＭＺ ｾ｜ｲ ｾＺＧ . u ...... _ . ｾｩ ｮｪｲｩ｣｡ｴｩｯｮｳｾ it is a ｾ｡ ｾ･ｲ ｲＺｮｴｦＭＧｾﾥＩｻｬ［ •....,.I.." .. esserltial 'v"::-" ｾ tile')'!', .. v ｩｮｴ･ｲ｣ｯｭｬｐｾＺｩｯｮｳｯ Ｎｾ］ ＩｮＬＱｬＧｩｴ ｜ｲ ;.:.. ';::.. or __ ｩＧＬｲＢｾＱｴｩＭＺＧ....::..;... ＮＺ ｾ ""1' <."J ＨＮｾ .... -t"l' Ｇ［ｾ j .ｾＮＺＧ｟ Ｎｾ !- _0 _;.:. _M ｩｲＬＧｴｾ • ...... , ｲｅｴｾ ｯｾ ｩｴｾ rll)"l , ｾＮ - - 1 ct n"r'lrtl ;" J.. J." J '-1 ''::''1::1:1':t' (.l,l hv Thes shif-L;jiH;S lei1(:t tCI \,)h:\.(;11 'He cannot ｬＧ ＭＺｊｭｯｶｾ 11h ｴ ｬ ｾ .... t' O' ＢｬＧ＼ｉｾ［Ｂ:...> ＭＧ＿ｻ o.J \J •. ｾＢ vcr bal oqlt 'LvocCt .;-, j.Of\S <J con£'1.[d.ng our att8nti m to t,1€ ＱＭＳＮｮｾｵｃｴＢＨＩ simply examining it with rospect to . _ .... lJ ...... " "-'.... ｾ • Ｎｾ j,tself an6, ｴｨｾ ｳｩｾｮｩｦ ｣｡ﾭ tiona to which it points ｾｳ ｯ｣ｩ｡ｴｩｯｮ｡ｬ ｹＮ On the cont.l.'al'y ｾ '\-/6 ean ｌＧｅＺｾｭｯｶ･ tbem, \'i0J call fir s·c fOJ:lliUlgte them (Jt:? e qu.i ｖｏｃＳＮｴＺ ｏｾＱｓＬ on ly by t1J8 afor e saic1 reflsct i vo Axamination of the intGr tional ｡ｩＮｦＱｬｪｴｩＺＬｾｓ and of' the or'ginal constitutJon of the formations, \<lith the effectuation of those aimingso . 66 In fact, Husserl goes as far as to say that ｬｾＢ 0 ., ver boll equivocation, in a certain manner, is essentjally necessaI'Jr .. lt It ",S obvious, from even a superficial r'eading of f Husserl, that he is concerned with a the phenom0nology di=jscrlotto!'1 of \'Ihat is fou.nd within conscious exnsr':cDcBo w_,_ _ _ _ _ _ W'. _ _ ••ｾ ｾ ..._ _ ._.....07'o .."" ｟ YEJt, takJ.ng into cons:Ldel'ation CHAprrER mF, vlhat ｜ｾＧ･ ..ｾ ｾ hCl'J8 ,._ sai.d in our. are we not imnwdiately faced \'Jith a p:.u'a.d x? WEJ have learned from our first chapter that Fussorl is dil.'BCU.f.'.g himself tmvards a. l."j.gOl'ODS Sc1.ence of Ｘｪｊｾ［ｓ･Ｚｾｊ Ｎｬ Ｑ ｾ ｣ｬＱＳＮｐ｜ｾ ｽ ＺＧ The statch1ent rl\Jh8t 18 fo\nd \vith:in ;onscious cxperienC8s ti , 118 shall find, carrie:; In jtsolf countless Gqu1voeati.ons tho ·tx' c.> • ＨＩＮｪＬｽＰｶ｜ｾＱ V\ h' ch lead us to ue have mentioned abova in our first ｣ｴｩｲｾｩ｣ｵｬｴｪｇｳ Hu fLnd I 1-,1 in this stutemcnt the terms ｩｭｰｾＡＮｪ･､ Ｎｾ n ,-, JI.....rl(,.. r::> I1(', l... .'j Ｌｾ n u "(') L'1" C .'L' u.. U ..) co x"l"" <':' c.' ｬｾ \.J ':>'_) v ｾＬ ｣ｨ｡ｰｴｇｲｾ ｬＺｾ ｭＮ Ｒｮ･ Ｈｾ｣ｴ Ｌ ｾ 111();3e !11oanlng s vary acco:cd in"" to tho eontext Vi i th 1..1 1,,/11 iel! they are Dscd .. vlo s:H''lll f:i.nd t.hat all of these terl11s have ＬＺ ｪｧｮＺｌｦＮＧｩｾＺ｡ｮ｣･ :1..1'1 desc.l.'lpttons 'l,l1l1J.e J 8.r:Lse out of the ＡｬｾＱ ｜ｬｲ \'1hat ls l'eqah'Gd for a philosophy of' Iminanellce. It :i.s ..fl.l. the 67 I.r.!... "/ the purpose of the present chapter to make explicit these "shiftings of attitude t ! and the subsequent chanr:;es in the meanings of these terms within each context, so that the essential meaning of phenomenology as a philosophy of ｉｲｮ ｬＱ｡ ｾ ence shall not be misunderstoodQ Yet the difficulty faced 18 not quite th i simp" e .. <.! ｡｢ｬＨｾ As a ph.U.osophy of Imi[k.nenee? phEJiJ.omenology must be to not elimina t.e, but ra. ther incol:,porate into itse 1 f not only the results of oAch type of inves' igation, but the very sph8re "\-'li.thin vihi.ch each operates; lt must find vi ithin ltse If each love 1 of' irrvA ;3t ig.?. tion thi1 t :Ls tlovercome!! in Ot'Cl.0X' to reach th:i.s ImffiLnence. HoncE'!5 as ,Iusserl el(:;1<1pl.y thl:! definitiveness of 8ac:b level all ays pointe> to ThfJ 1!1\'0 st J.;:,a.t iO.f!f> take on a patnf111 and yot ｬｴｮｲｾ avo:i(J.A.b:lc re1.c.t.i.v:i.ty, a provisio'Jnlness, lJ:'ls ,oad of a ､｣ｦｩｮｴｶ･ｯＺ［Ｎｾｳ f'{l)? ｉＭＧＡｨＺｩｾ｢ vle '...' Gre ｳｴｲｪｶｩｊＩＮｴｾＺ Each invcstieation, at its 01n level ｯｶ･ｲ｣ｯｍｵｾ SOl'l2 na:i v 0:'0 or' other, bnt ts st 1.1l ｡ ｣ Ｈ ｾ ｯ ｮ ｰ ｡ Ｚ ｉ ｊ ｾ ､ by tho llatvcte of' ｩｴｾ lovf,l == "'Jhlch ｬｩｭｾｻｴ OV0l:.'COme by mol' e pen(;trc1t tn;:; invest ｩＮ｛ｾｦｬ 1'" :i.g ｾＺｮｩ t -Chon bo iOll;'; of <> 68 This once arein what Ｇ･ｾ ｦｾｩｲｭｳ havl said nbovc ｗｾ ｲ･ｾ ､ｩｮｧ We \>J1sh to contond. ",hat it ls px'ec:i.sely this ｭｩｓＱＮｾＨＧＱｰＺｴＮＧＸｳ･ｮｴＺｪＮ ｩｯ Ｑ Ｎ［Ｉ of the phonomenoloc;y of gJnmn6 Ht'sserl o It : s nm-J our' t: sk to avoid this lGastS' makIng expU.e:Lt ｬｾ｢･ ､｡ｮｾ ＳＱＧ by? at tl)o vm'y diffeI'EH1t senSEiS of tlim!?IanenCe" and ntratlscendence lt in Russerl' s '''OrKfj Through this, sha 1 come to understand more clea:('ly some of the cultias face in our CHAPTER ONE and 1'1('3 ､ｩｦ ｬｾ come to under- ｡ｬｾｯ＿ stand 11mol it is that phenomenology is and needs to be a of exposition in this chapter, in that the precise reason why felt that a rigorous Science of all Being ｬｲ･ｾｳｵｒ could be based l (;1Xper ｩ ･ ｮ ｣ ｾ conse ious pan nde sct' 5.p-c ions of what is fonDd '\d.th 1n II \'1 :i.1J. not be fully or clear _y . stood until t'he precise sense of the terms L1S(:id ｾｲ･､Ｑｕｌ "conscijs ｾｲ｡ｳｰＸ､ｦｪ enough, we shall also come ｐ｡ｲ ｊｯｸｾ｣｡ｬ ｹ 0 see pateltly fal.sGu Tho a'c talnmel1 t or the s pbere of Immanence ｰｨ･ｮｯＡｦｬＨｾｮｯｬ ｧｩ｣｡ＱＮ any exposition attempted llef'oI'8 that ｉｴ｢ｰＧｾ｡ｫＢ hB.s been ef fected (i.n short? bef'orE! tl')e phonomenolo::; i cal roductj Oll has been p8rformad) rests on tho natural attitude, a sphere of ｰｨｯＮｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ ImnmneuC'8 ｾＬｪ ess(l!.itlally n.nd in principla impossiblo" Let us proceed, how9ver, so that \<1e may 513ft for ou:;:,snl.vos \tJhy it is "hat this ascension ls impossible to accomplishG We shall begin by explicating the sense of immanence and transcendence found in RusserI's Ｍ ｾ _ .. . .--.._. ". __--...__.. __._.. ._._,_.. . . . . . . __'-. ._..: The Sense of Immanence and Transcendence in the Natural AttJtudo ｐ ｟ Ｍ ｾ ｟ Ｎ ｟ Ｎ ｟ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｟ Ｎ ｾ ｾ Our purpose in presenting an exposition of the general nature of tho natural attitude in the phenomenology of Hasserl is to ｳ｢ｏ｜ｾ vle h01tJ may proceed f:com j.t an exposition of phenomenology as a philosophy ovlards f ImmanencBo We need to note, at the outset, that we cann.t proceed, in phenomenoloe;y ｾ of this att itude <; 1'0;: it, ｏｦＡ｟ｴＮ ｬ＿ＬｾＺ ｡ｳ ｌｾ unlike phenomonologyq i::' not concerned for the conditions of its ovm all It ｾＧｹｴｩｬ ｢ｩｳ ｯｰ according to HL1s.sell, Ｌ･ｳｵｾ｣･ｂ ･ｸｰ ｲＧＺｩＮ･ｮ｣ｬｾＧ natu.ral" science and v!orldly ＲＮ ｑ Ｌｾ procee(1 on 'he basis of tbjs attltude, 'ts centrality and importanc0 ｲＮｉＧｨ Ｌｾｬ (.". "',It "L):'J,J. ｴＮｰｾｬ . , c' .., 0, 'L Ｌｾ • _ _ U _r," ｾ｜ _ ｊＮｾ is most clearly 6ud concj.sely f 0 J.1 ｊｾｴＧｏ r, a"c·t , ' , ."1 t • '1'-" l ..! ..... ':' -}-v 'h ｾ＼Ｌ _ 11'-' ...... t'"fJ "l' ('" J_ O.f· .\. , in Husserl's ｰｲ｣ｳｾｮｴ･､ S ' I find cont.lnua 1 ｾ Y against lUC the on': ｾ ｰ｡ｴｪＬｯＭｴ･ｲＮｬｰｏｊﾷ｡ Ｎ " .. 0 t,.., .... , T ｾＭ＼Ｎ .... ·T':\ WlllCO J.. J.(l<,'.,(u.!. in 'i.t ｡ｭｾ ｉＧＨｾｬＮＡ ｴｦｙｬ "}Op"(1 'r ..ｾ L .( ｾ ＮｾＺ｡ '-,q ｾＭＱ ｾ L .. ｐｽＮＧｬｾｳｃｪｮｴ and stand tty,· over f.'nc"L,"o'ol.'ld to 1·\·...,"',"""('1 110 .h-"·,,:,r [;]..; ＢＧ ｾＯ｜ •• (.1·..hl·... , ｈｾＩ (... d 0 fL, . .1 ｾｲＮｉﾷｃＺ.l.Ｇﾷ ),X.ll.J. 1.£1 thn S:-l!M! 'VJ:.<! to it" '1'11'; fj ＮｦＺｬ｣ｴｾﾷ r"1 e '10""1 \' . . l t.rl'I',oad,r J C P opt t.her',) and also_ )0 ' it ｴＨｩ｜ｊＮｾ･ ｲ Ｇ Ｉ.'ｬ ｝ ｾ ｾｲ . ｾ '-'J \'1'L ....1 , 1 :i.C' "1"1""; " .."" 01\.. "-0 b-' I.: ..... l&.::. ［ｾｇｖｩＢｰ H,solf t(:..･［ｩｾ ..ｾｮｩｨｴｯｷａ［Ｍｓ｟｛ｾ that ･ｘｩｾ .d:,s out ｴｨ･ｲＨＭｾ･ All d.oubt.. Jng ami rejectj ng" of ｴｾＩ･ data of the flHtIJ.rn:! "'lOrLd leaves stariLi n;; tbe .4 US\'. iJS ｴｨＰｦｩｬｾＳ of thc"! ｬＮｪｾＧｊｬｴＸｮ ,-r·"'t, Ｉｾ＼ ..l.·r.l·"",«··, <1,::> . ct.\.. ｬＮ ﾷＴＰｊ Ｎｾﾷ o,-"]c'J" \-[181" 0 " 1)0· ·'-1 .[.. . ｾｬｊ ... ·,... v liQ"-l-hl'"ll,n .,JIJ...... L. ｾｲ "j-j . ｦｾＨ ｮ･ｲ｣､Ｎ .1..,,-'1 · .. ·t 0 '1'):" 'Ll-i c'" Sl,o.n-...l.PO:Ul _ Ie .'1or.( if' U."1'J ) ('dd .• ' •• v a -l-'v t11Cl. .:', .!'l.1: ｽＮｬｊrｾ ·f:'t J·t v, SUppO:H:la. ｾ tll is 01' t1J::1.t. \1ndo.t' Ith""-]"JUC)'!,!,..>tionll'1n' 't'll':> )J'!{"o t,. . Cl _ ｾＬｾ l ...... ., <. l{ < bl' "l' .;'n c' tI, ,,1 ·t , vc·o to s pc> .. ＮＱＺＢｾ 9 ' J , ' .... • " t.. il .I 4 • • • I (\, sei!;.;c of the gencl.'al be ing out .' her 8 , 69 0 _ _ t!1ests such n;:..lffiC s as 11'1\1"'1-ｾ 'De .... ,;.-, 1'1'1' 11 c' J. v U ! J . . .:! .1..0 n i l . lus ionl! of-' n.. ()'11. l." .. l',) 0 P i"1 "":Ll"\'-l Ｍ ｾ ｬ ｃ ,. .., . ,. -I '.. Ｌ Ｇｉｾｔ ｜ｬ｣ ｲ ... l h .. a ,vol'ld that has :1.1':3 44. In this statement of the general thesis of the natural attitude, we discover two lines of thought that need expan£iono First of all, it must be noted tha- in the natural attltude tbc Il;Jubject lt is takeD to bE1, in a certain e • oj.n that theoretical position which we shall call the nnatural stclndpotnt tt , the total. .fJeld of possj.ble ｲ･ｳ ｡ｲｾｌ . s inaicated by 8. Ｎ･ｬｾｽ ｴｰ word: ), t ' t I \ J " d GrJa, 1S 9 ｾＨＩ･ U>r L._o '10 Thu s, in cons id er ing tl1t:. i! subj 8ct" by mes.!' 3 of a ｮ｡ｾＺ［ｌｬｲ I .....,." r' t. \.J",,' objGct" nmonf, ot'nox's un:!.tylt 71 \.;1'}icll 'I. 'I.') e cal). .l ..' , '.thin the spBtio-t,cHllporal ＧｾｎＨ､ .. U:,,\)H ｾ Itcosmle T'\" ::,0 in t!1is sense" ing to consider the subj<'3ct i.ndepemhlDtly of that ｴｲｾ ｦｊｬ ｯＮｲ｡ｬＯ ｾ ｵｳ｡ｬ nSA '.S bOt \·/ould cons t i tute in f:Cotl the natUJ'al standpoint" That .. taj.lled,. 1.n this ; ｴｨ･ｮｾ 'Vi orld, ndly, it must also be notod that the world ｾＸｃ is seen to elf the ＳｐｅＧｩＮｴ ｯｾ ＺＳｴＢＧｬＮｲ､ｯ ｩｮｴｾ ...., ［ｾ to S8.y; thcn's 1.S IDCJ.in- thE! possibili-t.v of a radical v separation beb-wen objects as .!T!Qill!t and QQjects Hbic11 are meJ2.Jlt" 72 By this \ve mean that \'Ihat \<J8 suppose objects o be in our thinking about them 'objects as meant) may be in error, yet this ･ｲｬＧｯｲｾ tbis ｰｯｳＭｾｩ｢ Ｎｬｩｴｹ of ":i.llusion" or lthallncina:t1,on!1 does not sf1'eet the nature of the Objf.!cts as such (objects which are meant). This is to say that ｷｏｬＧ ､ｾ the Itin reality" is llout thcre lt independ13ntly of ei tbor it 1s as l.t ; Ｚｬｳｾ ur correct or inco.r·rect judgements about it. In spite of tho attempts on the part of the subjoct . to I\1101:J the ltJorld, tithe l:Lt I l'emains tl .. The gerlE1ral thefts of tho natural nttituda, therefore! carries in it a sgnse The world exists it a3 of it as thinking sub- do r·ot effect the ltbeh1[; out there" of' the vlOrld" Natu:eal ｲ･ｦｬｇ｣ｴｩｯｮｾ used to cr:i.licalJy 1'IOI'ld, prov'idE.i;3 llS with object as mr:J8.nt (-Ohilt '\IJ8 ｴｨＨｾ as:-.h::SS OUi' \';:nm·jlcdl:;e of the po sibj.lit,y of comp:u'ing the tbirl·;: the object vd,th thG lSI object which is meant (\Jbat tho object j.s 'tin rec lity·!I), \'lhlcb lear1.s to ｮｾ of ｩｬＱｵｾ［ Ｚｌｯｮ of tllC t.118 correctioll of error ｃＩｮｾｴｨ｣ dispelU ng (.., Yet th:.s l'f!flcction '.f> co.lled II nd t-ural ' ! nat ural standpoint as ti-:.e mainta i.n.ence of the II be j ng '1'he general thc'lsis of the nC:1.tIH'nl standpoint, thorefore, helps us define a prclimin8ry sense of imnmnence 46. and transcendgnce; The subject is 1Jllffi.{'tnqnt to the vlgrl.d. shows us the peculiarly paradoxJcal situation in which we have found ourselves, for in explicatinG the natural attitude, the nat;l1ral attitude. As \-.Ie have poi.nteel ｯｵｴｾ the thematic ",phere of invest iga t io -1S in the na tural a tt i tude is the ｬ ｩｾｲｬ､ and not ｢ｾＱ ･ｦ in .J,ho ｌＨＮ｝ｲｯｾＬＧ To &ttempt to make this belief expllcit and thematic i>Jhile taining tbe tha 0 YJ0. ｅ［･ｲｊＮｯＱ ｾｑｬ ｾＬ［ JiJ J impli.citly main- thesis of the natnt'o.1. att:Lt lI3.EJ, demands .R.t.0.2.!1J?,Q,9.:.'?2 tt.st this ＱｸｾｬＩ af itself is sometbinp, tr., the \'!01'1d 1.3 to once ag:::.in ip'p1. citly mai.ntain this belief and all'w it to effect 1t;o own. elf-interpretatioho As the inexplicit basis upon which all thC:J nat'1"[d v \ a.n mverjm!:...., \'li+hin i -rl,("lC' \.' l t) t '.1....... {. ""'_ # ｱｵ｣ｳｴｩｯｮｩ ｾ and ()('CUl-,t<:1 ..- •• , .'';'. v lICIt . . '"le; . .ｾ genuinely possible to make this helicf explicit on its own aCCCllnt Wit10Ut onoe again it and Laking ｰｲ･ｳｵｰ ｯｳｩｮｾ functions as an un\ro:Lced borizon ｾｳ lar, explicit acts occur o ｜ｾｩｴｬ｜ｩｊＮｬｇ vllli-eh 0.11 ＭｵｾＨｩｴＧＺＱＮ ｣ｰ we have said above, ths searhc- ing out of the conditions for the posSibility of natural knowledge and oxpGrience is the naturct]. standpoint anrt the bas .s, livj.ng as they do ｮｬ｜ ｡ｹｾ［ a problem that can concern ｮｯｾ ｾ｣ｩ｡ｮ｣･ｳ that occur on its H).thin th8se conditions. The all-pervas i ve condi. t ion of sc:i.enc:e and vJOrld 1y ･ｸｰｾＬ erience is the presupposed beleif in thA transcendence of the Because of its all-pervasiveness 5 it is 74 called by Husserl an tl nttitude ll rather than an "act" ｷｯｲｬ､ｾ As Husserl states: The general thesis according to which the real world about me is at all times known not merely in a general way as something apprehended, but as a fact\vorld th<it has bei ng out there ｾ does not consist f course ｾ in an 8,ct proper, i.n ar o.rticulc:\ted ｪｬｴ､ｧ･ｾ ment apout extstence. It is and remains ｳｯｮＱＨｊｴｨｌｮｾ all the tif }8 the ｾ［ｴ｡ｮ､ｰｯｩｮｴ is adopt.ed? t.,)Dt is 1 :i..;:; endures ｰ･ｲｳｩｾｴ｡ｮｴｬｹ during the whole course of our life of natural endeavouro 1 75 This merely emphasizes this , -+ 1 v ｾ gen81'al thcs:i.s, point above, fort in explicating OQ' WE' ＬｾＨｖｗ Ｚ tn a fo':, it h; precLsoly thf.J standpoint. In ･ｸｰｬ｡ｩｮ ｾ of tha', 'dOl'ld, '1'18 f5(>!1SEl'j our world and (as 1;JO +.v Tar-come as ｯｾｳ･ｬｶ･ｳ ｭ･ ｢･ｲｾ \-JOuld llover think: to :i.neln.de thIs tbesi.s? " a on, on ].' ｓｾI cae d I" rom :u:· ｜ · "oaS1S J' 0 holdinE; to the llbein s ｴ Ｎｩｬ ｾｕＡＮｦ ｩ as part of our explanation, for all our l' , . n'" ,c, e.' V e L" call" already a-.1 1" n Cl. ｾＮ t -'l.,l'. t liC';. ...t:>' ti 0 'r IHl ttlD .'" O' I' 1 pro- ･ｸｰｬｾｮ｡ｴｬｯｮｳ ve Q"i"'" I I lC 11 ty 9 '1" '.'!-' ]':,·t r l' !2___. .J.h,Ｌ ,1.___ .: ; ｾＮＧＢ now can :all it) the ))'31 iof in .-'-l:...._C>.r_·"'_v_. ｾ ＮＬ｜ ｾ .0),_ ｴｨｲｾ ("> • lI1 f ,Be 'I,? ,t.:_!｟ＮｾＬｬＧＡ ...:__ independent __ eXistence of tbA world _.is not.. .. found----..｡ｾ ｾ ...... _....hg}pif: all that -...-.......... - ... / We have chosen to fully designate this general thesis of the nntural attitude first, becau58 it is upon this thesis that most studies of consciousness and its llcon- tent.s lt oc ::Ul' We can also see from it the t Husser 1 may Q not proceed on the basis of this thesis, being as it is implicit and nnquesti,oned. As y.!e proceed, we shall seEI hovl he proposes to It overcome It tr is the sis (the phenomena log ical reduction) and why he feels that this is necessary fo,· the establishment of a rigorous Science of Being. Let us proc08d, then, as Husserl ､ｏｾＢＳｳ in his ｉＹＮﾧｩｬ Ｇｾ t: ｾ 0 oH:Ltb a series of observations within which we are not troubled '76 with 8,ny phenomenological B:.-.oche. H This vlill ev .ntua J.y allm-l the absolute necessity of the pheno"enolog:lc:.11 l'sdL1ction t () .s h O\'} its eli' • ｬｉｰｨｕＬｯｳ ｰ｢ｩ｣Ｎｾｊ Ｚｖｴ "11th thE) task of refuting a v:idespl'ead POsit1.0fl H ｦｏｲＩｾｬ of YJ1'Jich ｾＨｨ himself ,supportEJ0. in h5.8 I'efutB.t lon 1 \!w ca tcb the fir.st gl1romer Ｚｌｮｾｳ Th".s of phenomenology"" \'lOrk h::l.d as tts cen'cral anc! expU.cit ｭｾＮ ｯ｜ｬｴｨ 88.rU.G.l' &:i.111 Ｗｾ It e 0 0 to put log ic on tlJe SUX'G path of se :i.ence. 11 ｡ｮ･ｭｯｾＸＱ ｣Ｚｐｴｃ Thcf'j.rst part. of' -ellis '.-Jork PIU'0 8. ｌｯｧｩＨｾｬ Ｉ is a defense of lor;ical psycholog ist ie j nt.Gl'pre ｴ･ｾﾷ［ ｯ｢ｪ･Ｈｾｴｩｶ ｴｊ to neainst ion whi ell v,'ould found log:tc upon the psychological acts of the subject. As Husserl tells us: Here we encounter the disputed question as to the rela ｾ ion be t\'Jeen psyc' 10 logy and log i.e, since one dominant 'endency of our time has a ready answer to the question raised: The essential theoretical fonndation of lo'?;ie lies in psycho. ogy ｾ in vlhose field those propositions belong • • .which give logic its character:i.stic pattern e 78 Over and over again, througholJ.t this "\vo:ek, Husserl emphasiZGS that such an interpretation of 9.:£....ＩＮｾ ＥｑｮﾧＮＲ｝ ｊｾＮＱＹ ｑ as based on ｬｯｾｩ｣ denies its sci.c.nti.ftc chs.racter ｾ for it denj,(l s the II idof:ll ll mea.ni.ng S (If lOG lc by logic uf the certainty ｳ｣ｶｪｲｾｯ､ H sscrl tells ｕｓｾ :L11 t\}(:; ｬｉｐｌＧｯｬＸｾｯｭ ｮ｡ ｷｾｩ･ｨ \l ).:educ tng" tbE"JIT1 requir0g. ｳ｣ｩｾ｣ｮｯ to PUI'O ｌＰＸＱＮ｣Ｇｾ thc\.t :c .it is universally ｡ｾｲ｣ｰ､ that ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯ｝ ｾｹ is a f'actuDl s :1811.C8 and ther'C:lf'ore iOtfJ (.=rrrpjl'jc81 "clonec. do Sr1<.l.ll also not b;:) cont.i'ovo:cted jf:' 'vJe [lild thnt q ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬＮｯｾ［ｹ he.s so far lnc!-;-Gri eenu:i.n l2' [11)(1 ｇｾｽｏｦｲｨｴ exact In:::>, [·net that thG propositions 1.[; jt \>l11jc11 are dJ.g.n5.1:Led vJi-Lh the name of la'ws nrc ｭｾｬＧｃ ｬｹ ｡ｾｮＨＺＮｬ even if valuable goneralizations from ･ｾｰ･ｲｩａｮ｣･Ｆ 79 The attempt to base logic upon the empirical science of psychology tolls u.s, t ＨＭＡｮｾ that IIIi' psychological la\'Js lack 0xactness t the same must be true of tho propositions 80 r.o 1 . II .[ f' . resu 1 t s, 1 og 1C, . <H ｾ ｯ ｧ lC.. t. h 1S as 3. normD.·t ｾ . VA ｾｵｧ . d e d. for scienee (in itself) ·.S controverted. a [;orma tive e;uide for' psychology 50. We must note, now, two points relevant to our discussion. First of all, in explicating the statement "descr ipt ions of l>Jha t is found vii th in conse lous expert ･ｮ｣Ｈｾｮ 'vle can see that l/consciolls experlel1ce lt , for psychologism, is taken to be a series of real, factual psychic events, ocs ur ing j.n the spat io-tewporal/ causal nexus of I\ature. About such cons experiences, Iva can make only empirical ｾｩｯｵｳ generalizations. Russerl's central point of contention with this is that, in psychologism's analysis of consciousness s it confusGs the ｦＡｑＮＺｌ｟ｑ ｪＮｧＺｬ ＮＱｾ Ａ ｬＱｄｴ ｰｳｹ｣｢ｯｬ ｾ ｩ ｡ｬ 1'881 Ｌ･ ｾｩ ｾ Ul "\filth the 9.illI!::211t..9Li!1.0.Z!:l[Q§Jlt.? eV0nt Ａｾｨｷ .., \'1111c11 may be seen as a is meant in the wh ch, as a meaning, ｪｕ､ｧ･ｾ ｮｴＬ ') \.-.1 (:". is ｩ､･｡ｬｾ ｯｬＮＩＺｩｅｬ｣ｴｩｶＺｌｴｾＮ･［Ｚ Ｌ \-1 l.1 iCi"1 por'p Jl't to tltranscen1!l the act of j ud g GlTIElnt ｾ of a l1p.cct to b0' expla tD€\.l b.y ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｊｾｬ｡ ｾｯｬ ｨ［Ｈｹｳｰ ism by means ｡｢ｳｴｲｮｾｴｩｯｮ theory of an1 generalization. ｡ｾｴ "To be c, '.::ontcnt tl then !ileans Hto be con f,a ined in the R) ... ...J of ｾ ｪｵＺｊＮＳＨｾｲＧ･ｮｴ tlS C1• psycholoc;ism is a real ＨｊＮＧｾ｟ ｬｉｾﾧＧＡｬＩ an inJmaneJ1ce in so:nt·thi"1g (/lto be a yJe J'00. . 1_ can de' ｩＢＮＧＨｾ ｾＩｳｹ｣｢ｩ l'oal part of the p::.l.l.'·t. .., ｐＺＢＧｏｾｃＭＺ ｓｬ Q The in:uulc:nce'j \'lhich ､ｯｮ ｾＧ･ｳ 84 ｉＧ･ｦ､Ｎｾ ) . 'ｬｾ ':: o.f ll . ｮＸｾＩ m'3rely empirical ｧｾＧｈＱＮ･Ｚ｣｡ｬｩｺｆＮｬ ｴｩｯｮｳ｡ ｬｾ Le", to b0 ｴｭＺｶＡＮＱｾｭ ｩＡｬ ps yr."";" ";11"•. procoss in!! £'1'(\1'0 ｨｾｲｩｊ｜ ·. "A description of 'vlhat is found wi.thin conscious exp2I'ience": This tells us that \'litb reference to ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬ ｾ gism, we are restrict0d to empirical generalizations aoout what is fou.nd as genuinely ＼Ｎｾ ｬｉｊ immanent tn the psychic 35 process, a process discovered throuE;h "jnt.rospe,tion" 86 ｾｮｩｳ ｬ ｣ｏｦ on Itinner experience" 0 This vievJ, D.ccord.:Lng to Husserl, is an outgrowth of the naturalism of the ｮｩ ･ｴ ･ｮｴｨｾﾷ｣･ｮｴｵｲｹ \'Jhich inevitably le8.ds to a lo.£.t0Jll '(,, h . e po S ';:, 1.. tJ J_. l'l'l..L •yo"I J" .!i.9..Y:.P.-';;"'LQ..;h§.m a s• ｾ \; 0 87 S C J.' ＧＺｾA nee ｂｾｲ 9 _v n ｬｾｃＧＬ + 'u' !.?' a ｬＢｾ L> iZing consciousness fl (i.e., reducing it to real psychic 38 events) ｊｇｮｙＧｾ deny t'ie very possib' U.ty of scJ.t:ll1ce, by -'0 for the sciences. By doinc this, ｾａ have ｲｬｾｮｩａＱ the possi- biltty of a rizorous 3cientific endeavour. Russerl tells us that tais whole movenent is based on a naile ｣ｩｲ｣ｵｬｾｲｩｴｹＮ tells \lith roferenco to the DAtu:L'alist (and "11ereb JT I-lith ref'erer.l:.e to tle empi.riJ:al psycho10gist.) that: The r:aturDUst is? one can safely say? idealist and objectivist jn the? \olay h(e! net::.. ;Ie j s ＨｬｯＺｮｩ｡ｾＮ＾ＧＳ､ by tit!:! pUJ:'l'oSC 0(' ma:dn ..; SCi0IJtiflcalJ.y I010\Jn Ci in a way thAt comnolls nov v8tional indlvidlal) over .' 18 ｾ ｮｕｬ ･ good; he • ViS.llGS .(:!.? ｷｾ ｴＭ [1 4 • ｾ '1 I f" J ｇｮＧﾷｾ ｾｅＧＱｬｴＱ ｮｦＳﾷｙ 06nU'Cl Ul. an,' to l<::nmoJ hm·} to ｮｾｽｩＺ･ ＮＷｭ ｩＮＡｊ･ ｜ＮＧｉｨｾｴ its and tho ｭＺ ｾｴｨｯ､ by \'Jbich ｩｾ ... "j.s <. ｾ l.1'IL 1, I • univ8rsa} ･ｳ ･ｮ｣ｾ to bE! obtained tn the ｔｊＳＮﾷＧ ｉＭＮｩ｣｜Ｑ ｾｬｲ ease., Fe bcl:evgs that ｴｬＮｲｯｵｦｾ｢ natural sc:i'.<3nec and ｴｉｕﾷｏｬｊＮｦｾｨ pbi loscd)hy based upon the same science. the goal has been for tho mosl nart ｡ｴｾ ｩｄ･､Ｎ ｡ｮ､Ｇｾｩｴｨ all the ･ｮｴｨｵｾｩｱｳｭ thE t ｳｾ｣ｨＭｇ ｣ｯｮｳｪｵｾ 1ives, ｨｾ has install.ed h:LPlself as teacliG.l:' and TJract.ical reformer in rw'ar'.1 to the true, ｴｨｾＱ ?:ood, D.nd U)(',; beDut) t'ul, from thE·) standpoint of ntltut'A.l s:_'isnc8. He is, hO"'lsver, an idAal:Lst \»110 ｳｴｾ up and. (0 lie thinks) justifir-;s theories which deny ｰｲ･｣ｩｳ･ｬｾ what hA presupposos in his ictealistic way of acting, ｷｨａｾｨ･ｲ it be in constructing theorirs or in ｪｵｳｴｩｦｹｩｮｾ and recommending values or ｰｲ｡ｾｴｩ｣｡ｬ norms as the most beautiful and the boste e ･ｾ 39 Moreover, Busserl goes on to say that: The naturalist teQches, preaches, moralizes, reformsc • ou But he denies ｾｨ｡ｴ every ｳｾｲｭｯｮＬ every dem:.-u.ld, if i.t is to ｨｄＮｶＨｾ meaninr.;, ｰｲｾｳ pposeso The only thing is, he does not preach in express terms that the only rational thing to do is to deny reason, as well theoretical. as axiological and practical roason. He would, in fact, }dnish that sort of thjng far from him. The absurdity is not jn his case evident, but remains ｾｩ､ ･ｮ from him because he natural ｩｺｾｳ .recStSOrL, 90 It is ｾ then 1 f"F:>t so much nat11l al science that bothers 7 1-1 " ,-' (. e r 1 !i -'" \A........, v bl·· ｾ J. -:ｉｾ Scl.cncEl .101' ｴｨ･ｬｑｾ＾ｇｬ ･ｳ the attempt of ｮ｡ｴｌｊＮｾ 8 /..;ience 31 and and phi' osophy, \oJ:lJ,h0 u·'.: J'fJal.izin8: that they !:1Ove upon ancJ cQt"}stnnt1y pl'eS!)ppose the." r O'.vn Dnd cannot tv their verv nature _ _ _ _....... -..._.-;.t.-_.. put thE"Jse bases in ｱｵ･ｳｴｩｯｮｾ stressed !l{"lre, i.t is 11 0 the ｾｳｴｮｲ • ｏｾｪ･｣ｴｩｶ･ f01' "With [J ..... ｟ Ｎ ｟ ｾ ｟ ｾ ....- __...u ..... ................. ｾＮＬＮＮ .. 1li Tbis point ne'3ds to be ｯｦＧｴｾｦｪ claimed. >'h, t rejection of sc·l.enceo H ＹＱＭｾｶ ｄｨ･ｮｯｭＨﾷｬｲｾｶ Although t,lis sciences, it i.8 not precisely truR. Pheno- ll1enology cloes not alt gnth0l' reject Sc.iAnec o It rather 1'Oi' ph:i 10so'_ hy CClIl-not can'y in i tsel.f the tnLerent na1 vety of the Objective sciencesc vJhat ls implied in the lltheorytl of psychologlsm is the denial of the possibility of a theory as such. 92 By naturalizing consciousness, psycho. ogism does not merely leave itself with only eeneralizations about ･ｭｰＱｲｩｾ｡｝Ｎ the real psychic process, bnt it also denies poss:l ｴｨｾＱ biltty of l.ulO'."ing in _tt..u-:tl that that wbich it j.s dealinfo \oJith is truly a real psychic process about which we may only such is ･ｾ｡ｭ It wjshes to hold that consciousness ｳｴ｡ ･ｭ ｮｾｳｑ a real psychic pl'oeess, v!h de denying the ｩｦｌｾﾧＮＳＱﾧＢｑ ＮＹ possibility of essential HUSS01'l of p,c;ych01.ogisft: ｩｮｳｩｾｨｴ .:>ceptical relativ' sm taU." us tbat the 93 ｾ｣｡ｮ It . . . only bo J'adj.·:;ally ove:r.comG ..... as the emnir - ieal 94·sc teLc e 0 f nental attr ibt1"cC S of ani:nal r-ealitlo3" tl 'rtc; a.' ill of phc... omenolor,y frC'J 1l PS"/cllo ｾＮｏｃＧｴ .. [1. '1d ＱＺ ［ｾｴ｡ ｳ as a description of what is found within conscious exper:l,ence ｾ is clearl:l st,"\.ted by Husser'l r. Its 8.im is not t.) flxpln.in ｉｭｬｩ｜ｙｬＨｾ｣ＱＮｾＸ in th.6 p:":yc:hologi ':31 ｳ･ｮｾＮｪＨＳ as a 1'8.(:' ll.f.,l oet:1H'ene8 tn ＨＩ｢ｪＧｊ･ｴｩｶｾＡ natllre, but to shed 1 :i.£::ht on the Tdea of l{nml J N1Gf;! in its const.Jtu·::ive r.d.aments and l:i\I)s. It doc!.:: ｾｩＧｏｮ try to follo\'J un tl10 ｲＨｾＺＳＮＱ cot'ln(!:doJ1;j of ｣ｯｾﾷＺ Ｇ｜ｸｩｳｴＨｾｮ｣ＨＧｾ and ｓｕＨｾ ＬＨＲＮｓ to!.1 ...·i i th \,It'! i.en aet.ua l :"lC :J8 0::" knO\11ac!;':G ar", j the ｳｌ･｣ｪＺｾｩ｣ ｫｮｭｬ ｇ､ｾ･ l1tenvovel1 ｾ but to ｵｮ､･ｲｾ［ (,and U1C ｾＮｩ ,,;,.::;1 .... ｣ｾ［ｮ･ of.' ccmnoctioiJs in '.>Ihjch the ｯｨＮｩｾＢＧ｣ｴｪｶｊＮﾷＨｾｹ of may te documented. This clearing up tukes place in the fl'amm'lo1 k of phenOt:Lono] ｯＺｾｹ 2. as a phl:.1nOm-2!:()}.0f:y ori.encGd !1 S ia of.' Ｉ･ｾｴ､ｮｬｊＮＱｯｮｫ say to t.he ＸｾＺ［ ＳＨＺｈｬｴＭ and to the S .,rue"" tures of S0DSO thai beloni to these. Prom the ｢｡ｾｩｮＭ t) 'j...,,.,. _'•. , ｊＮｾＧ • ,structuI'C,S of' Dure ｜ｊＨＬｾ S c/. ..,+.V 0. • al"L ｬ._ Ｇ ﾷｌｬｲｾ C 1 t", ment;s involve not the exist'lnc(:3. L ,.,., 95 ･ｘＧｏｾ ｬＧｩ･ｮ｣ＨＮｬｳ ('·t"P'PS ..1 .' ｾ ａ ...... .... 1. ｳｬＺｩＮｾ ｨｴＰｾＺｴ 7 l'T'' ,..S .ｾＧｃｊＮﾷ ,::) Ｌｾ｟ 11 Jl''l' . fic I'G_· ('·:';'l· v"_ l.; ....1 refE:l.'EmCe to .l'p.3.1 What Husser]. then, 1s essentt:1U.illU:,g"ht into ｜Ｇｬｩｳ｢･ ｾ of essential insight, towards ｴｨｾ a substantial part of ｾｨｩ｣ｨ in the establishment of the possibility of a rigorous Science of Beingo To accomplish this, the "spectre of psycholoC'ism" must be definitively overcome. 1n explicating 'Ire have, at another ｾ Qp.nsp. - Itl·mrn"r.,enjr'etl • u. • ' . , - , Olro., arrived ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬ ｧｩｳｭｾ a 4 ., " J• ｾ ｾ 5 1'8"1 c;, . (x'oelle) .• ＮＺＭｾ denoting a peculiar view of consciousness as ｩｬｍ｡ｮ･ｃｇｾ a real ＨｉＺﾣｕ＿ＬｲｬｾｄＩ psychic process. vIe find als of tldesr:?':lptio113 of vic" that this j.s found within conscious ＧﾷＺｨ｡ｾ the possibiAity of a rigorous Science ､ｾｮｩ｣Ｓ possibility of essential analysis, it denies the possibility of Sctence (2) R lC1. n II imler expel' iencc il ｾ it ca.nnot lay c: aim sivity" demanded by a rlgoy.'ous in VJbic:h the ex:c IllS iv(:) focussing Tlu'Oil G1 ve are directed Ｐ｣ｊＮ･ｮ ｇｾ tmoJdrd:;; to the n ｩｮ｣ｬｾ Let us turn nOV1 an essential analysis of conscic)llsness and lts objects" The ｐｳｶ｣ｨｯｬ ｳｾ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4,;__ ...-._..... "" .. ｟ ｾ ..In iC2, L ChrtJ'i1C tel' ...... , <4.> _ _ ........_ . , t- er Ct1ap nevs and Natural ｒ･｡ｬｩｴｾｬＬ tza t jon _ _ .. _ . _ _ . _ ••• _ . _ ... f'. our O'f ｾｯ ｾ _ _ Ｌ ｾ 1".n s __ J ＼ｬﾧＮ･ ｳ｟ｾ ' 0 l' ':Tor lr1l1 _ . ._ _. . . . . . . . . . . . ＭＮＭＭＮＮＮＮＬ｟ＮＭＭＮ｟Ｍ｟Ｎ｟ＭＭＮＮＬＮｾ Consc ton3J10 ss . .- i .....ld.ea. , en:.1. 1 '1" . l.... on5c ｊ Ｎ ｏ.ｕ ｓ ｾ sec Husserl dealing with pl'e- liminary considerations of the correlation between the notions of uimmanence" and "transcendence ll ､ｩｳｾｯｶ･Ｎｲ ｣ｬ through an essential analysis of consciousness and its objects. We are expressly given the context of these inv8stigations. Husserl states that he wlll: .start with a series of observations within 1,lJhicb we are not yet troubleCl Hith any phenomenological epoche. '/Ie 8.re dirocted to an Houter vlorld tl and, within forsaking the na ural standpoint, reflect • & ｄｳﾷｲ｣ｨｯｬ ｾ ＱＮ｣｡ＱＮ ｻｂｬ＿ｌＮＹ ｟ｦｾ Ｎ ｲｬＩ ｾＧＯ･ｓｵｳｹ V on 0111" OldO rJ?'O 8.1"1(1 its eX"Q13r lences ouX';;;slvcs Jpreci.sely as· He ·oou1.d have done if we had never heard of the new ﾭｾ･ｩｶ po5.nt ....... 96 ｹｮ｡ｾｬ c1 :i.ffcl'ent sense s oj' arL!:;f1 ｃｾＮＩ｛ｏ It irmnanence II <-;.nd ft transcendenc e U of tl ese ensll.:ing investi28tio su Yet., as Fink ｉｾｬ t:he I!.1e;:Li tl)8S0 de."L"initions ＨＩＮｲＺｾ :n no I,my meant to ｢［ｾ p1"](:molnenolur5-cn11" dofirlitiv'3 eonceptua:L dClterminations D The intentional analysis of the ｾｌｶ･ｮﾭ ness of the imm3nent over and ｡ｾ ｩｮＳｴ the giv6nn2ss of th'3 trQllscer:dent ls in no Hay A. fO?:lTIlllAtion of the Hc1'itcrion t \ for their doJ.'in.tiv8 COnN:lpts 7 but o!lly ｐＱＮＧ｣Ｚ ［ｴｾｮ ｳ thE! transfoJ.:'FtJtion or ＧｾＮＱ､ｬｩｴ tf'adltionaJ. tU f.fcl'enec. ｾ :i.nto an i.ntentional one. ThDS, af-::'er tho;: first. present8.LioJ1 of t.lv.:! phenomenological epe-ella, HUi3:3crl must ega) n returk] to Ｎｾ 18 .i10tllI"a 1. 8.ttitllde in o'l.'del' to cn:C'.:cy out ｮｾＭｊ intentional ｣ｨ｡ｪｾ｡ ｴ･ｲ iZHtl OD of thc! \·lOr1.dly· consciousness on its ＨｙｩｬＮＧ ｾ term,::, that is, a chrlTc3 ::teri7..atjon of t",18 relat:i.on ｢･ｴ｜ＭＩｯｾＧＱｮ llnmD:lcn8P, and ｴｲＺＰＱｳＨＺＭ ｮＨｬ･ｮ ｾ 'rhis does not OCClll' as [i result of a p!'edond nat':>ly rrmndanc interest in ｫｮｯｷｬ｣､ｾ｣Ｎ Bere it is neither a qU0°tion of a tl'2d.1Uonat .pi:;te?:1oJ ｯＺｾｪ ca'i ｰＮｲＧｯ｢ｬｲｾＡ Ｑ r,ol' ;::1 ｮｯｩｾ｡､ｲｮｯｦ for ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬ ｾｹＬ but rather of an interpretation of ttl(; essence of conscitlLlsness prepa'r.or r to the pel'f rmance of the epochaQ 0 97 The series of observations found here scrve as a ､ｩｳｴｮｾｵｨＭ ing betvJ8eD imnlanence and transcendence as seen in the ev ldent difference betvleen the as a real Ｈｴﾣｾｬ Ｉ ..ｾｴＺ ＮＹｊＲ Ｌｌｾ ｧｬｶｾｮ ･ｳ｟ｾｦＮ conse ｩｃＲＮ ｨＱﾧｽＩｾ psychic process and the ｾｩ ｬ ｩＩｾｓ ｣ｯｮｳ｣ｴｯｵｳｾ of \'Jhich Ie are of a difference \-Jhi.ch Bus sel' 1 is to 1'e sol v e (QlJ..t not d issolva) under a ne\" sense of Immanence and a ne\-/ sense of Consc iousne S3 0 The method c 0J..l1Ce this method of resolve is not as yet performed, it is vitally important that we keep in mind the context of tlJe se inves tiga t ions and the it' pre 1 imilJ.ary na tuX's" It is also vitally important that we keep in mindthe immenSE) diff'icuJ.tJ.e,s that arise out of HUSSGI'J.'s Legj.nn:i.I1[; ｴｨ･ｳＨｾ preliminary investigations vli.thin a. context" Husserl had discovered the method ｬ｡｣ｩｾｯｬ ｨ｣ｹｳｰ of reduction as early tl,B ｰ｢ｴＳｲｪｯｮ ＨＱｮｬＩ ｯｾ ＺｩＮ｣｡ｬ ｾＮｕＳ 1907 (although he had yet to ｲ･｡Ｑｾｺ･ sequences)? as I"ovealE', in a set. of lcctl-tres entitled 93 oL__ｾＧＺＢｑｴｬｃｾＧＺｊ＿ＨｭＮｑｮＲＵ｢ｅ Ｎ Ｌ［Ｇｅ ｾﾷｬＨ his 9 its full import nnd con- yet he \vas to spond the :c-es'L of' ca.reer in sea.1"'ching for the cCJ.'rect and ｰｨｩｬｯｳ ｪｊｾｬ ｣ Ｎｬ clearest metbod whieh to present this methl)j to the j Ii as yet lluninitiatod tl rGader. As \<18 havC! seen from our CEAVrji;t\ or'Hi.:? this Hinitiation Ls by;10 InGallS s).JJlple s trs ｩｧｨｴｲｯｬＧｾﾷｊＸＮｲ､ Ｎ DC with a ox' Th is second sect ion of .Tr.1Q;;i:?, pI' e ser:t.s ｳｴｲ｡ｮｾ･ and difficult combination of introductj.ons to phenoml-lllo1o;:;y, the UCarto sian ;"Jai l ann way". Husserl, in ｣ｯＺＭ ［Ｎｭ･ｮｴＺｾ ｦＮ orA hi.s JJ..ｾ ..1.§' some t'\\lenty years 5'7. and aplroach of that earlier work in this way: I note in passing that the much shorter way to the transcendental epoche in my ｊＨｾ･ｅｬＮｳＢ owhtch I call the ItCartesian i' ayll (sinr;e it is thoug t of as beinG attained merely by reflectively enｧｲｯｳ ｩｮｾ onesel.f in the Cartesian epoche of the Meditations while critically Durifving it of Des｣Ｚｾｩ ｴＮ･ｳ pl'ejudice:3 and ｣ＢＧｬＭ ｦｵｳｩｾｮ ＩＢｨ｡ｳ a ｾｲ･｡ｴ ｳｨｯｲｴ｣ｭｩｮｾＺ while it ｬ･｡ｾ to the transcAndental een in one leap, as it were, it brings this ego int view as apparG. tly empty of content, since the's can be no prapatory explication; so ODe is at a loss at first to ＱＮＺ Ｐｩｾ Hhat has be ,n gained by 0 it$ much' ess ｨｏｾＢＱＵ s··artin;; iLi.th tr:is, a ｣ｯｭｰｊＮｴＺｾｬｹ new sort of fl)Jyi.amen ·.al scisnee, decisive for philosophy, has b80n attained. Hence, also, as the reception of my ｳ｡ｾ､ｉ shcwed& it is all too easv riqht a.t the very ｢ｾＮＩｩｴ ｲｵ［ﾷｩｮｧ to 1\111 tack j nto the ;·laJv0natLJ:J.'ul ",tti tudE! ｾ scmetbing t.hat is very tC:?1;,'·!.:Lng in any case" 99 tS.!.'"ld to ｾＨｩｖ with Husse:cl. 1 s self-:Lrrtel'pl'e"l;al.ion ､ｩｾＺｄｧｉＧｇ･ ｾｌｏ 8. L t h ｩｾ po int ? for tbe pI'e 1 i.minary psycr-wlOf1, leal ･ｸｰｯﾷ ｾ 81.-:-'10n of tbe se<.:Gnd sGction of IsJ-l'_9:.:,l tends, l'[-ltbe:c ·',han Ill. ea ding to t.ho transcendental ego in one groat to lead to \1 ｾ HdetourLnG" :lnco ps:rchology 1dhich, ･ｳｾ［ｯｮｴｩ｡Ｎｊ ｬｹ Do del!'l'J.mlL>. that eap ＧＢＨＭｾ fall back :in to the anJ thorAfore not be lead to the ｭ､Ｎｾ e-f18.tul'al atU GU:]\:) in one groat leap, ･ｾｑ to fundnmentnl n,i s1's pre sen tat i.ons of tlJG whole pur pose of these reflections, as we shall soon We alr0Rdy ･ｶｾ 0 that the entrance into ｉｮ､ｾ｣｡ｴ｣､ . he problem-sphere of transcendental l1 500 ｰｨｇｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹ from ou tsid e l\ of that sphor.e pJ:esents us v!ith its immedL.te an:"l IXU'J.dcxic:1J. ｳ･ｬｦﾷｾ･ｮ｣ｬｯｳｵｲ･Ｌ a ｳ･ｬｦＭｇｮ｣＼ｾＮｵＺｩｌｕﾷｅ ivhich 58. §iii9.11. iva have also seen that this Hbreakthrongh ll to the sphere of phenomenology by means of the phenomenological reduction is absolutely necessary, for it alone (as we have yet to see) will establisb phenomenology as a philosophy of and thereby ns being capable of attain- ｉｾｮ｡ ･ｮ｣･ ing the ststU5 of a rigorous Science6 The second section of Husserlls is set :i.n ｊ､ｾ an unusual contextG He has already presentod us with the general nature of the natural attitude as .we have outlined it D. hove, and has ｢ｲｯｵ［ｾｨｴ in tbe notton If t'n(! logical reduction. Yet, he forfeits the ｣｜ｊＮｬｴＺｌｇｾ［Ｂ＿ Al: ｰｨＸＮ｣ｃＧｭ ＿ｮｯｾ ｩｮｳｩｾｨｴ of the of these Q1l8st::.ons reqU\l'( ::lnswerlns., for trts secU on c n prove to be one of the mOG t Inislf.lBd ｾｮｩ ]01 in lusser-l ' s ｶＡｏｲｫｾ O. (. ShOL1.1.(). nota thDt ｉｾｵ ＩＮ＼［･ｾＺｬ r ::.(:(;tion3 is frame h,is prcl.tminary excursus tn IDJ.!0Ll<:tge that con be rea.dily I1.nderstood* 'rhi.s is at once useful ｄｲｾｪ ､｡ｮｧ｣ｬＧＨＩｵｳｾ mislead into thinkins that it is possible to base the phenorr.enologtcal analysi.s on a pl?elimin8ry l;sycbologic8.1 exlg e s i.s G l.,et us expand on this be fore \'Je pre sent a g(:081'31 outline of the content of this ｳ･｣ｴｩｯｾ The secU.on of 1slfu1§. under by being ｣ｯｮｳｩ､･ｲ｡ｴｩｯｮｾ as Husserl readily admits a psychological reflection on the nature of cGnscicusness and its relation to the vlorld, shows itself to be in the midst of an incredible tension, for it is an attempt on Lusserlls part to IIbreak-through tl to a realization of Dure or transcendental consciousness ｾ ＭＭＭｾ｟Ｎ｟ＭＭ｟Ｎ｟ＭＭＭ｟Ｎ｟ＭＭｾＭＭＭ means of a starting point which, by its very nature, 102 defies that realizatioD¢ The influx of this tension by into EusserI1s \.:o:ck presr-;n"ts a difficulty in our exposition of it, ｬ ﾷ Ｉ Ｇ ｩ ｌ Ｂ ｱ Ｈ Ｚ ［ Ｎ ｾＮ ｉ ﾷ ｾ fO.t ()In • ＮＺｾＭＬ cannot, in \'i8 ..._.::'::'.. ...., .... ..｟ ｾ c ·t.,: cor;c·cl'c,l1s"'e ｟ｾ ＮＺ ＮＬ ｟ｾＧＮ Ｚ ..._-..*.. ':-':", '1 ::...t<l • \;.i ,nuous ._ 01 o.ev 0 .LOpmerl""t J. ""'1 proceed from a ESjTch-. ｰＮｴＧｪｮ｣ｩｰｊ･ｾ r' l)'\r·fil,:::.an . J ｾＮｊｃ［ＺＩ ;1 Ｎｾｖﾷ Ｑ ＮＬＭ ｴＱ Ｎ ｃｓﾷｌＺ､ ... _ oJ 38S , the acheivement erE! someho'! a cant :Lmw tj.on and exten,s ion of the tendency 103 _ as if the acheivement of land ｴ ｨ ｾ ｲ ｣ ｷ ｩ ｴ ｨ \<J of S,D me in descriptive psychology and its analy- ｰｾ｣ｳ･ｄｴ o The centrRl diffjculty with Busser" 's analysis 1 ｩＸｾ in. the fac.:t. tl1Cl t be n(-'ver ma kc s, :Ln this sec t ion, a ,L18d.ical brenk '.d.th the psychologicCl by allOlls us to ｭ｡ｬｾＨＩ fund.amE:!0 tally incol'l'ect tlssl1mptJons as to the nrture and purpose of beg inn; ng \;J :i.th ｰＩ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹ con sc iOllsne s s as ｊＮＲｅ［ ｲｬＮ ｧｦｾＮｊｨ･｟ ｾＺＡＮ Ｐ ｸ ｬｑＮ presupposed by the tend0neyo HE! . here- ｰｳｾＢＨＧＺｨｯｬ ｧＺｌ｣｡ｬ itselfn y (r:.s is expof'i t:i.on) and then attempting to Itdragl! consciousness OGc:k out of its real 60" attachement to Nature, Husserl necessarily equivocates He tells us expressly the purpose of these preliminary investigation" : We can all perform acts f reflexion to be sure and brinz tlWfo. 1<Jlthin the appreh:?nc1ing gJarwe of consciousness; but such reflexioD is not yet phenomenological, nor is the COf)Sc:i.OlJ.sness RYH, rc:''nended pure consciousness" Radi.cai. discussions of the kind we have undertaken ure, therefore, nAcessary in order to penetrate to the ｫｮｯｷｬ･､ｾ･ that there is, indeoJ can be, any such tJing as the field of pure consciousness, which is not a portion of nature i'self .. " ." 10-+ But we must recall here that the consciousness wI ich is not a portion of nature HCu.t off 'l f.rom j its relatJon to thG \.,1ol'ld, a1.holIgh it is l!credj.tly cc::. sy to l.lndcrstB.nc.1 Vlh<:).t ｬﾷｉ･ｳＬｾＮｊｬｈ S8.YS in this meant both psycholo\;ical consciousness and objects ｯｮ｣ｾ｝ of thot consciousness and now i t means or includes only ob;jecb.:>{' c:Ollcerned \'lith only oriE:! abstrRcted porti.on of natut1e, L,Ge ｾ ｰｳｹ｣｢ｯｬ ｅｾｩ･｡ｊＮ consciousness" As Hll.sser1 tolls us: " ｾ .. it 511::411 beCOffi(; clear that the tra.nscendental study of ｃ ｈ｜ｳ｣ｪＬｯｵｳｮ･｟ｾｳ ､ｯＨｾｳ not lfi"'lD.n ｨ｣ｲ｡･ｳ ｾｲｵＮｴ｡ｮ and ｾＸＮｹ not ｰｲｾ ｳｵＡＩｐｏｓｇ thi3 as a pl'eIT!tSQ, sill-.:-:8 from tts transcendent:)l ｳｴｃｬｮＭＺ ｬｰｯｩｮｴＮｾ ｬＧｾＸｴｬＱｲ･ is in ｰｲＩｮ｣ｩｰｬ ｾ placed Vlit.:1Ln th, hradr:rtG rJ'hey 81.'e DeC cssary in ordqr that. we ､ｬｯ ｨｾ {now that this detach·· ment from tho whole world in the form of a phenomenologinal reduction is something totally differelt m from the mere abstract'.on of certain components of an embracinz organization, whether the connexions be necessary or merely factual" 105 Although Husserl beeins with a psycholoeica1 account, what is eventu' lly required, despite the completeness of that 8.GC0l1nt, is a ra.dlcal break \'Jith the psycho. og1 13.1 tendency (tending as 't does to be a regional science of a portion of nature) in the form of the phenomenological l'edllct ion" This requirement itself accoum.. s for not only, 106 as Fink notes ,the tentativeness and fluidity (if not dOllmright c labiguity and equivoc:Lty) of the terms used by Hus ssr 1 j.n 1.9 eg-il, but also for the ina biU.t"l to !.fJW:..Jls:J.:n with a psych0]ogical account an5 then som8how enter into ｰｨｏｾｬｏｭｾｮｯＮ (lgy, as if the transition and the sl;])sequent ｲｆ､Ｎｾ ｣Ｎ｡ ｌ tro.nsformat:iol1 of the meaninGs of the t.erms used \.Jere someb Jill to beCOfn8 'J'he exact to break I'l:i.th the ｯ｢ｶｩｯｌＱｳｾ foT' the n(Oe(l for phenomenology· ｲＮ［ ｾ｣ｵＺ［ｯｮ tendcn.:y is based on the ｰＤｹ｣ｨｯｬ ｾｩ･｡ｬ r'ldical. nature of the n,uesttons posed by . benomenolcgy" the psycholo;ical account of consciousness itself :s based, j.e", the unquestioned acceptQDco of the existence of the "101' 1/1. and .be exis to nCG of ennsc iousne ss in the poss5.ble type of res8arch for psycholo;y (as 8_ ｜ｾｯｲＧｬ､ ¢ strictly natural sciGnee) is Nature-research into the specific region of the \wrld C1 ttt ed the II pSycrHJ I! ｾ The Il condit.i ns foJ' the 62. possibility" of psychological research are not a question for psychology. Hence, the tension of Husserl's account in IdeQ.2. is not fe 1 t si.mply be cause :L t is psychology • Rather, because Husserl has already introdueed the method \;lhereby the eroulld of' the psychological account of consciousness is to be "bracketed 't (the reduction), the simple return to psychology leaves it in an uhstable state of transition. This instability leads us into ambiguities as we shall see. Psychology and its analyses, while always moving on the asis of the thesis of the nRtural attitude, can most assu.redly prov j_de us w tth by "1-.'6 may eair.. 2). Ｎﾧﾣ ｟ｶ･ｬｊＮｌｴｃＺｓｾｊＳＮ ｯ ｾＸｌ｣･ｮ ｾ･Ｇｉ ｢､Ｑ prel:lminary :l.nd:Lc:at:i.on of the nature of ＮＲＡ ｾｑﾧＮ Yet becausE! of the ｰｬｆＧｮｏ｛ｵｇｮＨｬＱＮＨＩｧｹｾ naive context ＨｾＸ［Ｍ ･ｮｬＭＮｩｦ､Ｎｬｹ ｾｨ･ of Lbe psychological account (iese, ance of' its unradical accept- po::,sibillty, a possHiLLty the ques O'{l.'l of "Jhier) lies outs:J.dc ｩｴｾ［ ｰｲｯ｢ｬｳｮＺＮｾｳｰｨｇｬＧｃＩ \')(3 Ｌｩｯｮ Ｎ ｴｾ 2re more l.i.lrely to run :',nto CCdlfustng oqui loeations, \-Jhtlo keeping all of this in Intnd, let lL the tUX'D Ｍｾｯ ｉ､｟ｾﾣﾧＢ and see hO"J thi s tension manifests itsel.f o We s11a1.1 soon see tha"t tte w cont,ext of the ｉ ｅｭｃＺｴＮｮＨｾ ｣･Ｂ ｰｲｾｳｴＳｮｴ ch2ptor, yj.z:* ') an it 010 as ension to throuph psychology, is es:-,entj.ally impossiblo" because of t118 radical and eS:'elltial cU.ffererlce bet'vlcen psychology Ci.nd phcDomt::Jnol0f.:Y" The method of psychology is such that it cannot encompass its own possibil.ity; it 'l.s tllUs dangerous to asswn aut "ntranc e in to t ｲ｟ｾＡｊＮ［ Ｙ｟ｾＧｬｲﾧＬｊＦＮｌ＿ｨ ｴｨｾｴ it can prov 1:18 a clear-0 ｮｑＮＱｬＺＲＬＹ｟Ｇｾ 0 Husser1, in searchiJg for an indubitable foundation with which phenomenology, as a radically self-critical Science, 111 Y begin, commences cha.pter four of hi.s ljea s. questions: Indivi ual consciousness is interwoven with the vlOr1d i.rJ a hJOfold '-.'ay: it is 801118 mans cons iousｮ･ｳ ｾ oand in a larg f3 number at least of :Lts particularizations, it is a consciousness of this \·/orld. In respect. nOl',; of this lnti1lltl-te attadJC"!ment \oJ i th the real \<10I'1 d, \·/bat is meant by saytng -ella t. conseiousness h;JS an essence lI o f its O"..;n ll , that with 0 ｯｴｨＲｾ consciousness it a ｣ｯｮｾｴｩ ｵｴ･ｳ ｳ･ｬｦＭ｣ｯｮｴ｡ｪｾ ccnn8xion detern:ined purely t'1rOUf;b this 5 j ts ovm eSSl-lllCC, th3 ｣ｯｮｩｬＰｸｩｯｮｾ namelY, of' the str0am of cODscioD.St1ess? ｾＬｲｯｘＧｇｯｶ･ＮｲＬ sinc:e ·we eRn int81.'pret COrISC ｾ ousne·ss in the H id(L'3 t. sense to covel' ev 8Etaa 11,,i:lhc.. "Lever the concapt. or expel'ienCfj ins ludes ｾ the quest) on conC'8:('r15 the eX";)8]" ienec··,s trOAn1S o"m ｾｮＬｅｓＡＨ iiul nature, and that of-all ｩｾｳ cOffi90nnntso To What extent 5 in the .f:irst places fiJ\.tst the material vlo:-ld be fundamentally d :\.fferent in kind. excludcJd from the experienc9's own assentls1 ｮｄｴｾｲ･Ｎ tnd· if it is thi.s, ii' ove:L' against conse) .JliSlj8SS awl the essentinl ｉｙｾＱｩｮｦＺＧ l!PO )Gr to it, it ｩｾ［ thEJ,t \'Ihi.ch :is ｈｦｯｾｌＧＨＩｩ＿ＺｮＢ ".nd H"'"lr.l1C2J:,11 hO':1 can consi.otlsness be intOl'\..ＮｴｩＭｾｬｔ ［Ｚ Ｍｮ･ｶｯｬ and c01}se"cinc:ntly \·/ith ths whole vJOrld tbat is . J. ion to consciousness? 107 \{e Cl.":G then facod \'d.tb a \tiO:cld \'lhich our experience ｾｩｴｨ ･ｸｬｳｴ ｾｈｬ､ \"hich are not apt to ccnfUS8 108 objrJcts of that experience; the tha task. bm"ever, l,s to pinpoi.rr,: the furdamental and essontial difference ｢ｇｴｾＺｊ･ ｮ these t',1:W :('e:;ions of Boing. The essentlal analyses or chap '.el' four of );;tQ£!5. I ｾｩｶ･ｮ ｯｳＮ and ag .1nst the ade<l'da.8 of The material thing, given to us in ＹＺ ｲＮＺｰ･ｲｩＨｽＮｾ (Erlebnis). . ｴｲｃＳｑＮ ｾ Ｎｑ Ｎｄ､･ＮｄＭｴＮｾ ｟ＡｾｴｩｯＮｽＺｬ is ahiays givl3n "from some persp(lctive 1! and only of i.ts aspec ts tl. Thus our ev idenc'2 thing we are 109 fOIl ｳ｡ｹｪｮｾ 11 in one that the is this way and no other wny ･ｸｰ･ｲｩ･ｮ｣ｾｮｧ remains in principle incomplete. We are ｡｝ｾ｡ｹｳ subject, when ､･｡ｬｩｮｾ with objects, to further investization, fur- ｾｨ･ｲ acceptance of evidence as to it c nature. That the thing is thA UpOl ｷｨｾｴ \iJ:1Y we think it is remain' hereby [;.hlays cOJl1..:!-..Q3.911.t future experiential confirmation or disconfirmation of we prcsently take to be the case about the object in .it is, as we know, an essential feature of .1-1-,(, oJ J ｟ｾ 0 it ｊＭＱ｜ Ｇ ｾｲ 'v : oJ •• '11"\-·,1(1 ..'t .....- 1... "':':,l .L.' tc:.,. ri:,ly ＨｾｯｮｬｩＺ ＧＮ ｲｬｾ • ＳＡＧＨ Ｂｾ ｾ J..l1')iL.. <.:.r.... ｾｬ｜ 1.r;,\.) ""''''Or:'-;o'' ｾ .... ..:::: ［ＧｾＭＮｊ . _ J \',.J_ l J "10'}P\10I' t ".., , ｾｅ ｴＱ［ ＧｩｊｮＮＳ ,.. ';::l(:l 'vltU; this the ＮｦＨＩｬＧｉｏ｜ｬｩｲＮＡｾ nan'!'.. ｾｹｊ _ . thn:, E've:cv / v ･ＰｬＱｲ［･｣ｴＹＰＮｾ -"'''''-'I''",,-·;t.. Ie:: 1. ..... ｾ v , absr;1.ute Htthin i\'.s 1.8 os,senti0.11y· ･ＺｃｬＩ ｪＧｾＺ［ｊＮ ｲＡ｣･ e .110'\'1- ever f2r it extends, leaves open the possibility tlw.t vhat is ＡＬｩ ｲＸｮｾ dGsrii: Ｈｾ tho ｰ･ﾷＧｾＺＩｩｳｴＮＺ ｮｴＮＺ C0!1.,3｣ｪ ｩｬｾＩｮ･ｳ of' it.J oor111y ｾ･ｬｦＭｰＩｾｅｬ ＩＧＺＮｬｮ｣ Ｌ ､ｯＨｾ Ｇ I!.9..t. 8X:Lst" It is 8.n GssGntlal1y "'Hlhl 1,HI the.t 8xist.enc(, i.n the f()cjj) 01' c: 1'.11 1..:1;:-: is rlP.VEF' ,1.elp.,mdi?d as nece n ｓ '.' ｾ｜ＧＺｉ l"r ..-ll"·r:··t " p L •.r v ". L.11- ｏＮｪﾷｾｙ ＨｊＧｾ .1 "_i.;..• ﾷｾＧ ＩＺ｜Ｍｬﾷｴ0.1.. Ｚ ｖｾ ll- c,_.l ｾＧＺ［＾Ｂ \.u\ll, .. '. . .l.D "':) <.< ｾＱＧﾷｬＭ ＢＩＺ｟ｃ C.t. l,r.,lD way is 31ways c(·ntincent. Th1t means: It can aldays bnnpen that the ｦｵｲｴｨｾｲ c urSQ of ｣ｘｄ･ｲｩ･ｮｾＸ will cOlnpcl us Lo abandon ,·?hat 'rws ｙＱ｣ＮＡｾＭＧｴＱ｡ be (-HI ;:;et dO\oJn and j u.s t if i E:d, ＧＺｾｬｊｴＭＮｄ ....2j. ﾷｾｴｲ ..ＺＮ ｲｉｾＮｊｌ ［Ｇｾ Ｈｌ ｾｦｄＮＹ ＲＱ ｉ＿ｃ｟ . _9r It v:;"3., ＮｬｾｳｊＨＱＺＧＩｴｽ ｾｌ ｬ ｳｩｯｲ［ Ｂｅ ｬｊｾ ｵ｣ ｮＺ ｻ ｩＶ Ilb3. 0 e I\,.J() ｮＱＸｉＧｅｾｬｹ sa\,' .. rtj?i.1 e lLlu=; a coherent 2t{.earl1 cmd the '-:8 8f'1...ｾＮＺ､Ｇｲ［｣ＱＢﾷＭＺｲ 8 110 1t.Je must re8all, hOHcver, thn.t this l1c1CeSS8.ry ｹｾ｡ｵｱＸ､ ｮｩ the givenness of the transcend3nt object in transcendent of wav or ｯｴｨｦｾｲ..-..-_.-_...._ ......_.. "out __ ....",..__there ... ._ ..-.l' ｊ＾ｬ｟ｾＮ｟ＢＮ｟ " ｾ The distinetJon \</e natul'allv v maintain between objects as meant (what we, with our inadequate eVidence, take the object to be on the basis of that eVidence) and objects which are meant (what the object ｰ･ｲｾｩｳｴ ｾ is "in reality!!) still above w',th reference to As 1>1e sm,; ｬｪｺｾ <}ll.est:l.on to stating general t. esis of the natural ｴｨｾ the vJOrld and the objGcts in it attitude, ｬｾＮ ･ｳ ｵｈ Cl.re taken "Ii-thout ...s.1 and illusions and hallucinntions rimst ｴｨｾｲ e struck out of it, bIt lithe lj.t' remains!! .. This analysis of Hl1sserl ' s as to the gi.v8nness o:f transc endent 0 coni' irmH ti.on our be LLGi' . n the :i.ndepelxlent exi stene e of (Jf bj ee ts ｓｨｏｾＴ s thn t Cl de finit i VEl and f ina 1 tX'o.os.:.: end ｾ ｮｴ X'Cll a:l IS forever ex,is tGnce t .. us j Dad Gqua te GIll' b81i.e:L in tbe i1' Lndependent ｾ l'(·,lTia.\ ns presupposed (. doxically, that the ｣ｯｮｦｩｲｮｾｴｩｯｮ It also ;,;11ov]s, para= of that belief (or at .Least the 8.ccul1ll1at"i.o;:1 of 11101:'8 ann mOl'e ev:Ldcnce tc>ncHng tOiwrds ｴ｢［ｾｴ conf:i.nna t; ion) must oeem' -LIH'OU':(U our oxper 1'21"1c e of tho object. He can S8C then tl:at. the Clonfi.l..'D13tjon of the existence of objects indepenlantly of experience can only OCClU' tilLs Hay by nppeaJ. to thnt that \'18 fo!' it is oLly in ･ｘｄ･ｉＧｾ･ｮｃ･Ｌ have ovidonttal (as opposed to su)posed, uns pported be li'8f) knm,l18d ge of thl:l i11g. th . ｲｯｘＧｾ A'(", ＨＩＱＭ ｾ - ｩ｟ｬＨｾ y - ｦ･Ｈｾｬ - ·t.h ｮｯＧｬｾｮ･Ｇｻ v >;:; or"_｣ｬＱｲ･ｳｾｬ,.• ｔｽ ;;, .. ｭ･ｬＧ｣ ｾｲ pJ..'e uw tl'CllJSC endent oJ cal'''lvsl' JO,.J .S ｾ , by beginnlnf1 on tbe bClsis of the thosis of the natut'al Experience (El'lebn s) hO\vev8r, does not include the necessity of presuppos.Lng its Experience of' the ･ｸｩｳｴ･ｮ｣･ｾ stream of' consc iousness, eiven through ｩｲ ｌｾＧｬｊ ｑ Ｎｴ ...Q2:t9..9Dtj__.9J2, doe s not allow for inade QU3. te ev idence for its exJ.s tence. vel' and af,ainst t1Je tJlQ.1.e..9.1aJS':. and th ﾣＮＹ ｮｴｩＡｬｦＮＺ ｩｬ ｾ gi 'enness of thing tn transcendcmt perception, vJe have the fullY.: III aC]§"''lnn.t0. ard a12?Q.Ulte. givenness of' experionce (Erlebnis) j.tself. Husserl says that: Experi,·mce. ｾ ｯ､Ｎ Ｈｾｓ not pj.:'Eisent itself. This LllpliFJS th8.t ',lil.'! perception of experienc'3 is pla.i.r :Lnsif,ht jl1to somr:thLl[: \'Jhjch )[" ｮｯｌＺｾ｛ｰ･｣ＧＡｊＺＩ is v,ivc:n (or tel \),,! ,j\'on) us ｄ｢［＾ｯＺｊＢｬＱｴ･ｾ ax1 not os an identity ｵｮｕ［ｩＡｾＮＺ ｪｲｩｏｾ s of a ｾＩｲＺＡＧＮｬﾷＢｈｮ｣ E! s t.hroiJsh pOl' Sp8(, t ive eon: t:: nun. All th:::.t itH. h.!3ve <:tatec1 conec;:ni-rw +he ｰＺ｜Ｎｶ･ｮｾ jｬＮｾ hA<:<' ..... l J • )f' Ｎｾ Ｇｾ ＱＢ Loｲ＾ r 1. ... 1. ':J • 1)0'(''"' \. CI J _ "()C0C! .l l.) ,,', • .) ｝Ｇｴｾ ... 0 ",n"nir",rr J L, 1'. ｻ ｾ ｯ Ｊ • ｾ［ＺＢＧａ ｾ '':L.. .l \ .I". \'I!=J ..... 1-111l"-f. ｾＮ u brinu this home to ｯｵｲｳ･ｬｾ･Ｓ in deLai. ｾｩｴｨ full olearness. The ･ｾｰｲｩＰｮｃｇ of a ｦＸ･ｬｾｮｧ hAS no perｳｰ･｣ｾｩｶＲｳｯ If I look upon it, I hale ｢･ｦｯｾ･ c an absolll'Le ; it ha s no a spec ts "\rIb ｨｾＮｩ mii.dl t ｰｲＨｾｳｻＺｮｴ themselves now in this ｾ ｹｾ and now jn ｴ ｡ｴｾ In ....I••h ｏｬ Ｌｾｉｊ l" ｾ t , T_ r.,-"(,n ｾ ' ) •.l"" {.,.a)·St,. '1 '.::> 1" . ｊＮｶｾ ＧｾＮ ).., ｬｻｾｉ Lf..\. L,_ l, .•'1 ,,r j y u.ｾ I)ou. JL\.C thAt \'Jilic 1 i.3 the.1.'e Ｑｾ t:soJ l1t.ol y ;,lj th l.ts quaU.. ties its jntensitY9 1s there ｡｢ｳＨＩｬ ｴｯｬｹｾ 112 J. , . . . " "';' , Thus, the evidence for exnerjenCG itself is absolute evidonce nd not subject to future ､ｩｳ｣ｯｮｦｩｲｭｾｴｩｯｮ｣ his Cal'teSi[-lD description of From this ｰ･｝Ｂ｣ＨｾＺ［ｴＮｩｯｮ j Husserl continues ＨＧｬｸｰＸＮｴＧｩ･ｮｾ ", y ｳ｡ｹｩｮｾ tha;: mnor+8nt eonsequenc es follmv. Every imma nent tho ･ｘｩｳｴ｣ｮ ｯｾ If ｪｾ･ｦｬ｣ＭＡ ｴｩＮｶ｣ <l!,ol'ehensi on is directed noe,:;ss8.t i.ly ［ｾｴｩ｡ｲｈｮｴＨｾ･ｓ t G 0 of tts ｯ｢ｪｾＧ｣ｴＮ to my experience, I apprehend no absolute Solf whose existence ... ｾｩｳｾ in ｰｲｩｮ｣ｩｰｬ･ｾ undeniable, that ｾｳＬ th8 insight that. :.t does not exi.st ｩｴｾ i,n pr1.n.ciple, impossible; it would be nonsense to ffiQintain tho POS3 ibility of an experience eiven in such a way not truly eXj,sting 0 The stream of Gonse 1oLlsnes::.; \'lh1el1 is mine, that namely, of the bno who is thinking, may be to ever so great an extent uncomprehendE3d, unknQl.-JD in its past and future reaches, yet as 306.0 as I glance towards the flowing life and into the real present it flows throufh, and in doing so grasp myself as the pure subject of this life (Jhat that means wil exｰｬＧ･ｳ ｬｾ ｣ｯｮｾ･ｲｊＮ us at a later sta::;e), I say forthw.i.th and becall sa I must: Iam, th is life is: Q.oc; Ｎｯｾｴ 113 It seems) then, as a result of this securing of the primacy of the cogito, that Husserl has arrived, in a fashion similar for which he has been seeking, the sphere ｷｩｾｨｩｮ which , phenomenology as a rigorous Science of Being may begin. He CU[j SOB tbat th() meditations '11.l::iscH'l has given us, althoueh th"'y are not carried out lJ.nder tbA exp-'Bs'" authority of the phenomenologicaJ, reduction (and are not a r'ddical transform{ltion of tlJ8 trad:i.tional epistemological ql..1GstiolJ; namelY1 "Hm'/ con t""JO l'eal thi.ngs, subject and :inr; hj.mself consistently to tho and ｴ｢＼Ｚｾ ｚＮＱ ｾ ［ｐｬ｝ﾧＧＡＢ［ｕ Ｂｾｊ｜ ﾣｴｮｘ＿ｑＮＺｃＧｾ＿Ｎ crebe ｴｬｾ｡ｮｳ｣･ｮ､･ｮｴ of '",he imffia lent. ｾ Busserl is already ｢･ｧｩｮｾ ning to move within the parameters of the reduction, shOWing 68. It is at this point that we may begin to run into difficuJt'es. Husserl tells us, with a seeming ref- crenee to the Hrela.tion bet"Jeen 'i tbe system of experience grasped in irwaanent perception, nnd Reality, grapsed '.n transcendent perCelJU.OL, that: Between the ｭ･｡ｮｩ ｾｳ of consciousness and reality yawns a veritable abyss. Here A Being which manifests itseJ.f perspectj.vely, never giving itself absolutely; there a necessary and absoluto ｂ･ｩｮｾＬ fundamentally incapable of.' ｾＧｮｩＲ｢ give.n throulb appearances and perspective-patterns. 114 Moreover, he goes on to say that: ＨＧｯｮＢﾷｃ_' ｬＧﾷ ｬＬ･ＢｰｾＧＬＮ . Ｎｬｾ｟ｊ V"t':'>J..... ＨＧｯｮＢ ｩｾｅｊＧＨｩＺ Ｇｬｴ ,.:>, oJ l.:,) ...ｦｾ .. t ｾ ｮ ... J ..... t.:..J...1. )·.;.s ,.L, !\DI'Y'l'ty'!l .......ｾＺ｟ Ｍｾ ｶ .• be r\ Ｘｫｯｮｾ｣ｬ as ｾ sAlf-cont8 ned sV3tem s ｹｾ［ "Ct'! m 0 f' ;'1.1?§;:J ＡＢ［ｉｹｾ ;;2ｻＧｾ［ｉｲ ri'f;o-ｯＩｬＭｨ［ｻｔｩｾＧ i ｣ｾ ｬ Ｇ Ｉｾｴ J ... ;:.) ｊｾｩｮｧ 1"1 t fn g- \<!hicb nothin:'; can ･ｾＳｃ｡ｰＨｾ［ 1,-lh:i.cL b3.S no Sl)at1o-to:npo.l.'aJ ＮＳｸｴｇｲＮｩＨＩｲｾ HDd can be inslde (l() spatia-temporal sy3tem; \'Jhich Ｈｾ｡ｮ ｯｴ exp('lfionce causf:l.lity f. 01"1 ;:'tnythi·l[.; r,or can it excy't c8.u.:.:nli ty Ｑ ｪｾｯｮ Ｎｾｬｮｹｴｨ tng 7 1 t be j n::; pre supposed that 8ausaU.ty bOars tl18 no;,'!'ml sense of nut '1'111 c:ausali ty fl8 D. relatlo!1 of Ｈｵｾｰ･ｲｪ､･ｮ｣ＨＭｬ between re111ities. 115 CLn penet.rat.f3 c.rd It 5.s bTl-DUS from ｦｬｾｯｭ ｴｨｾｳ that HU3serl has cOD3ei.O!l:1:'18SS from 1:ihtch be ............. ｕＢｾＭＧＢＮｲﾷ｟ • .., ...... ｟ｾ ....... ｣ ｭ Ｈｾｮ｣･､ < Ｎｦｵｮ､Ｈｾｭ･ｮｴ｡ ':J0 lly aro no 1. n;-;;el' Yet the tende1lcy to intcH'pl'et cons c i ou.sne 55 in th i s manner is almost unavo:Liable ｾ express means whareoj said abovp; that the ｌＱｬｮ｡ ｩｴｬｧｾＧｓＺＱｴｦ ｳ fO.t' jC 'IJ9 have not as yet beE!n ::r,iven the may avoid this tendency. We have found in Hus:"3e.rl l S work need to be placed in their respective contexts, yet we have not yet entered into the con-ext of phenomenology and cannot as yet express fully the equivocations ｴｨｾｴ are here to be avoided. it By establishing the primacy of the coeito, seems t''!at Huss\:rl has found the sphere of indubitable evidence reqlLi.rcd for the establJ.sbment of a r in the inclubitD.ble ....... £ivenness ＮｾＭ｟ＮＭ also Ｍ Ｍ｟Ｎ Ｍ Ｎ ［Ｍ ｾ ｾＮ ＮＭ｟ｾＭ｟Ｎ｟Ｍ ＭＮ ＬＮＭ Ｍ｟ＭＮ ＭＮ｟ or ･ｾｮＸＮｩｲ ･ｮｸ Science ｩｾｯｲｵｳ - itself'o --,- It seems ....... ... the dubitable givenness of transcendent objects ｾｨ｡ｴ must be completely disregarded by a rigorous Science, for undermine its Sc'Antific frow ｴ｢ｇｓｴｾ that. all of ｾＢＺ＾ｮｳｩｪ･ｬＧ｡ｴｩｯｮｳＬ \'Jholly OLl t Does it not soem, then, ｣ｨ｡ｲ ｾｴ･ｲｾ of ccn.s idera t ion by must be left ｾ･｡ｬｩｴｹ pbe nom ｾ nology? HUE3 se.Y.' 1 iBn If bEJtween conse i olJ.sne ss ard i{eal i ty ther 1.3 is an meaning and if consciousness itself is a and impenqtrable of ｳｹ ｴ｡ｾ (3 byss of ｳＸＱｦＭｾｯｮｴ｡ｩ･､ an analysis of consciousness ｂ･ｩｮｾＬ would thereby seeM not to include or he able to includo talk of Reality at aile To re ffirm a question we raised u r·:let.orons S<;irJl1ce of aT) 3eL"'0' if his Ｎ ｾ _ _ l.o •••• _ _ and in .. ＮｾＢＧ ｟ｾ _ _ . _ .. ｉｪＮｾＨ［ｴ ｾ of ... c . . . _ . _ . _ _ ,.u_, ......... _. ,... ｣ＺＧＮｴｪＭＬ･ｾ ｴｩｯｮ .. __ • ___.. .• is fO''''usseJ .. __• •__ ｾ｟Ｌ possiblp. mtsrepresent3tion that HLlsse'1 ｩｊＱ ｾｩＮ the proCe(·-!l.lre in the :,Lv emp{-yof ｣ｯｮｴ･ｮｴｬｾ ｾ v • •. . . - . _ . . _ _ ｾ ｉｾｈＧＺＡＮｾｳ 10ft us "ltJith an eG"'o n.l) ＭｲＮＺ ｾ Ｇ ｔｨｪＬｾ［ is ro.... J \J ｾ 1Je . ｦ･ｅＱｬｾ , ｾｴｉ ｾ｡ｰ ｲＹｮｴｾ .. mo.rel.: r , ｢ｅｾｃ｡ｉＩｓｇ 70. he tried t.o react transcendental cODsciolsness "all at once", but rath(:r bee he did not o.11ml/ U.3e or the possi- bility or psychological misrepresFntations of his intentioDo It is ba sed on tbe fact that Husser 1 tl' 10 s, in the to ｲｅＺｬＨｾ｣ｨ ＱＮｾ ﾧ ｬＱＮ ﾧ Ｌ the central and authentic meaning of phenomenology by means of or by ;;18:/ of psychology. l"!e feel that tis attemp-G at an "ascensiofJ to In:manence tl is a ends necessarily in ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯＱＰｾｩ｣｡ｬ ｦ｡ＱＮｵｾＧ･ RD(': ｾｩｳｲ･ｰｲ･ｳ ｮｴ｡ ｩｯｮＮ These psychological ｾｩｳｲ･ｰｲ･ｳ ｮｴ｡ ｩＰｮｳ lead us to belie ve that conscic)usness is somehoH "left O.TEr tl after the elim:Lrlntion of that i>lhich is dllbitable; as Husserl ｳ｡ｹｾ Ｌ conscicusne3s on the appearan :('} of rei tlpheno •• ｴＮ｡ｬＺｴ ］ｾ 117 . .· Ihic'n can \dthstH.nd the process menolc£;i-:::Bl J.1?'s·duum" to helve \-.lon acces;;; to reeion of Ec ing ｲ｡ｬｵｾｩｴｲ｡ｰ le forfiet consideration of the whole tbat R031tty t3 to be consc iOl1..-nes._ "? but Without first the arc told reduction, ｰｨ･ｮｯｭｰｮｯｬ ｧｩｾ｡ｬ and ambieuitias, for w. can ｣ｾｮｦｵｳｩｯｮｳ only understand the nature of transcendental and its difference from ｾｇ do not Y'2"G see l1m·] this correlate ｣ｯｮｳｩ､･ｲｩｮｾ we are l'ad irto Realityu only af:, a. 'Vcor:cclate of ｣ｯｮｳｬ､･ｲｾ ｬｾＬ･ 01 ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬ ｾｩ ｡ｬ ｣ｏｮｓ｣ｩｇｬｾｮ･ｓ consciousness by means of this redu tion. need not reB.fi'irm our potnt in full. i:-l e are \rIe not yet able to see it is that Husserl considers ｨｯｾ consioL1sness 8.nd its Ilcontentsl15 for He have not yet performed tbe phenomerJological red\1ction. This leaves us vith the confusing attempt at making a tra Isition from psychology to phenomenology, a transition whlcl canLot be a ccompl i8hed as a smooth) con L.j,l1UODS d eve l.opme" L ;:J..nd. -_ mentiol1£;d ').bovco --.---_ An as ｾＨｈＱｓｩ -'.n tel Inllnan,,;)v;e is GS3enU.all"\:" ......... _.-.--.-.--_-.. ..... "'--,..... ... -. -....... ... _-..._-_ ........ _---.---.... . -.... It ｳｨｯｾｳ ｨ｡ｾ Jl my ｾＭ Ｎ Ｍ Ｍ e t'. ate 'h e '{) h ole .h G sis 0 not proved to be a wholly useless ｾｦ ｊｲｴｯ A]. t lJ 0 t l!?: h cha,ter, it e ｾ \.J [J t b is f us again the difficulties faced when a ,tempting to enter into phenomenology's problem-sphere. It has also givon us prt.:d.iminary of the Hctivity of phenCJJlenolor;y ｾＳｫ･ｴ｣Ｑ ｇｳ consciousness and between ｰｨｇｮＰｭｯ Ｑ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ and ｬｾｮｲ ･ｌｴ transcendent perception, will be reconsidered and reevaluated once '18 :lain ｩｮｳＧＡｾｨｴ into thf' he have ｲ･､ｮ｣ｴＺｩｯｮｾ also been shown in a concrete manner the nbsolute necessity _ _ . _ ... . - ._ _ ....... . . - . . _ . _ ... \:Jithout it5' ide remain subject to ｣ｯｮｴｾｌｬｊｕ･､ ........V' ｟ ｾ ｟ ｾ ...... _. equ1.v cations ....._ _ 'lL.. and to ｴｨｅｾ overpower ing tendency to l'elTIa in in the DC tut'al attitude and to interpret consciousness psychologically. This tendency shall most certainly arise anew. By ｾｮｩ ｧ･｢ with preliminary psychological considerations, Husserl has only aggravated this situation. Our exposition remains quite incomplete. ｴｾ･ｲ ｢ｹ Yet we have centered on a difficulty which Husserlmust ove:r:conlG in order t l'e-cn'lakon phllosophy to its true Husserl must be ｾＹｨｯｬｃＧｧ､ＲＮｩｬ ｯ consiol1sness trent ff'lI fr011l & ble to not leave us . . l:i.th a Rea.lit.y. He must be able to find, Immanent i.n tl'anscen,::'i(wtHl consc :LoLlsness ｭｯ ｾｮｴ of Rsaljty ｾ every lost by the process of method- ｳｯ･ｭｩｮｾｬｹ sp1'i9X'8 of Ijiill181181v:e wbich we are s8ekinz 0 1'10\" tl18 task is to f i.Dd the true sense of this consciousness an1 the sense of the ｉｭ｛［ｬ ｈ ｾ Ｑｃｏ OJ ReaU.ty II i.n it" e III We ours 'Ives shall be drawn into an inner transfornmtion throu3h whi.h we shall come faca to face with, to ､ｪｊＺ＿｟ｦｌｾｅ＿ＮＺ［ＮｐＲｌＺｨ＿ＩＲＹＮﾧｬ of ｾ t\ c long folt, but constantly coneE-wled dimension of t.he lttranscendｾｭｴ｡ｬＢＮ The 3Y'Ol no of expel' lone _, opHned l1.lJ in its infinitYQ \'111.1 then becoMe t'.c fertile soil of a ｭ･ｴｨｯ､ｩ［ｾＱ w rkine phi: osophy, with the selfevidenc9 furt Armors, that all conceivable philosophic;al a.nd selenti.fic GO ｰｬＧｯｨｬＨｾＡｬＱｳ of the gl'olwd" ｝ｬｾ He al'e nOH concenlcd Hith cbaracterizi.ng ology wJshes to establish itself as a subjec -.ivity) revealed by this help i.'.S ｓｬ ｾ｛ｴ ＾ＮＱｬｾｦ of ｰｨ･ｮｯｭＰｄｯｬ ｾｹＮ trtJ.8 P!.lSt, RT 13 bA posed anddecudod by stalting from this ｭ｣ｴＮｨｯ､ｾ ＮｴｨｓＧｾ Science of ｲｩｾｯｵｳ TtJis metnod \>Jill to overcome thE'J L:rtr<18rJse dJ fticul.ties h&ve .rewed Vl8 in UllG."'11't'hJng the centrC1,l and atlthenti.c mE.!D.ning Throueh this, we shall com8 to sensa of our cbaracterizing (73) ｰ｢Ｘｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹ SCG a,s a the J2h.tJ..ｌＧＺｬ＿ＮｧｾＡＹ ＷｾﾷＮ claim thA.t phenomenology itself to be the consummation snO'1JS of the Ideal of 3cientific (and therefore genuine) philo"'opby i.tr.elf. \.\fe must emphasize, however, tha.t the phenomeno- losical approac:h is not simply a mears of immediate access to a pre-disposed and closed set of problems. It is, rather, a method by which problems and hov they are to be answered, simple matter of dis- is opened-up. It is not, that is, pqlling enigmatic areas of investigations. It is, in fact, the exact reVerS(1. As Husserl ｳｴ｡ ･ｳｾ " • "by carrying ont the epoch the phenoi1lpnologist by no means ｳｴｲ｡Ｇｾｨｴｷ｡ｹ comman1s a horizon of ob- viously ｰｯｾｳｩ｢ｬ･ new projects; a ｦｩｾｬ､ of work ､ｯｾｳ not ｪｭ ･､ｩｾｴＹ｝ｙ ｨｩｾ preformod in a set of ｯ｢ｾｩｯｵｳ ｴｲ｡ｮｳ｣ｾ､･ｬ spread before types. The world is tho ::;Cd.H unlverSG of i'.'h8t i.s ＱＩｲｬＳｾＡｪＮｶ･ｮ 3.S obvi.olJs. It'ro!l1 the ｢･［Ｎｾｊ ｮ ｩ ｾ the phenomen01.o?;ist :l ives in the ｰＳｾ｡ ｯｸ f ｨＸｶｪｮｾ to look ｵｾｯｮ the cbv'ous as auestionable, as ･ｮｩｾｭ｡ ie, and" of henceforth hRini Dab18 to he.vG any other sc:t8nti r.Le thorne thctn that of ｴｲ｡ｮｳｦｯ｝Ｇｊｮｪ ｾ ｴｨＨｾ {.;ni ver' :38 1 obv iou:sness of the be j ng of the wor.d -- for him the ＢｲＰｮｾ･ｳｴ of all. enigmas ｾＭ into something int011igjble 119 Th:L " ma ki.ng enIgma ti.c t ? of that which was taken to be the most obvious (the ex:istenco of the Horld, taken fut' g.ranted in the na ttH'dl at t i tude) leave s us is most J'amiUJI.r to ｉｊｓｾ ｉｈＱｾＡ ble to pre suppose that This account.s unnat.ural anr ' ltstrange t ' ellerac tar 7 fOi' \'111 ieh phenoilleno]o;:,y f s as \-.'011 as defining its rad :Leal i ty. Hence, as F'ink notes: The rcdl.lction leads us into the darkness of SO!llethir g unl;:noHD ｾ some th in l " vJ i . h v;\'1j.c r: "\-10 have not been prrJviol1s1y fami.li.aJ'lized in terms of its f017li13.1 style of ｢ａｩｮｾｯ The ｾ･､ｵ｣ｴｩｯｮ is not a technj.cal installation of a knowledge-attitude ｷｾｩ｣ｨＬ once established, is finished and complete once and for all, and which one must simply accept in order to v./and8I' subsequently throuGh d c10matn which lies upon one and the same level, but i t is rather an ｵｮｾ･｡ｳｩｮｧ and constant theme of phenomenological phi.losophy. J.20 Let us now look at ho\ Russerl speaks of this constant theme of phenomenoloe; ica 1. ph i losophy: tl1e Dhe.Qgme ｬＮ［ＢＺ＿Ｍ｣ｩｾＩＹＱｯｮ If He 'l'S Ｍｩｾ｝ _ v.::> • Ｑｽｾ c oJ ｯｾｔ C s tho mean ｩｮｾ ｮﾷｲｬＭｴＢＩｾ 'v v l! 1 I}. ,) (.J. v * . of th8 .ped nc tin c. e'verytll ing ·tC) ｾ､ｮ ｴｑＧｊｧｾｮＭ ｉ Ｇｊ ｬｲ a Is allilo.st j,: I . ,.) . .Lh.-..... ｾ J 11'1"38 st.ab10. 121 1tl can easily allO\" ourselv·1s to be throv1D anee again into the type of circ'11arj.tles encountered above in OUt' CHAPT EH OJ': 8. Tha t \-Jhich telnpt s us to mi suuder 8 tand the thrust of the phenompnologicaJ. reductj.on is the tendency t.o interpr'Gt its in terms of the natural ｭｯｶｻｾｩＱＬ･ｮｴ ｡ｴ ｩｴｵｪ･ｾ That which allows us to avert this temptation to misunderstand the reduction is the ｲ･､ｵｾｴｩｯｮ itself, for it alone Ilsets out of action l ! the v8ry thesis v-Jhj.ch le8d us astxoay. But "\',18 need nOl-} \'JC have had enough of thls spinning of c5.t'cle"'. to attempt to posi ttvely logical reduction as the ｭＰｴｾｯ､ The pl1enomcnolo,! ｩｾ app'oa h the plwnomeno«· of phenomenol gical inqulryo al red ｵｾ t ion somehm'1 d i1.' ec t5 76. i tse If to\"lards the genera 1 the sis of the natural at t i tude w1th the expre ss pur pose of ffi?:.ls:.inE._CXD1.ki t the t Hhich is constantly presupposed in our natural world-life, and interpretations of objects encountered in that life. It is precisely this explication Vlbich c10§...S.,..J10·L9.£..Q..l!:. in the natural attitude and VJhich lillY.!. if it is to attain ｾＮＺ ＧＨ Ｙ vJithj.n phenomenology status of a rigorous ｴｨｾ ｓ｣ｩ･ｮ｣･Ｎｾｯｲ this explication on the part of phenomenology to be possible, it i e' necescaly that some sort of ltbreakf! ''-lith t'he tendency to rest our investgations .2ll the gCl1i?l'al thesis be acC'omplishｬ ｩ ｾｭＬｑＮＡ ｲ ｴｮＮＲ ＱｯｾＧＺｩ｜｣｡Ｎｬ ed. The meth d of this a::complisbment is the Let ＮｬＧ･ｩｴｮＬｾ Ｎｴ ＲＮｮ ｾ see ho,,} \V3 EU.SS91'l speaks of the rerJu:::;tion in its relation to tIle genervl tllesj.s of the natural DttitudGe Tho method of the phenow8nolo,,:ic:al :ceductioJ 5.5 is left stanAing, eVAn in the revised edition of thi" \'lOrk (J.913), 8.S ＱｾＺＲ a ﾣｴ［ｾｳ｣ｲｊｄｬＺｶ｟ｦｮｹＢｱＬ｢Ｙｑｙ｡ IIm-Jever, lIusserl does speak here in such a manner ns to R low for tho future ｾｅＧ ):'U1 UFI. t his later \<Jorks .. ｾＨｮ ion of tbo riot ion of thE! reduc tion in realized that in order 0 be able to philosophically examine the conscious ncts within wlich logical Obj9ctiviJ'"' ｡ｰｲＨｾ｡ｲｾ jt is necessary tllat, inste8.d 12.3 of being "" • ,lost in t.he should x,C',th'3:l' ｰ ｲｦｯ ｮＺ ［ｵｽﾷｾ［｣ of acts" (Ie make tht?se acts expli.cit by means of' a of reflection which all.ow: us to overcome our It • • • ｬＱｵ｣Ｈｾ naj.v8 l?Y· acceptDDce and asses"ement of objc:::ts". Thts reflection ｩｾ［ｹ 77" however, not yet phenomenological in tie full senss, but these passages do indicate Husser1 1 s awareness of the necessity of philosophy to overcome the naivety of n8tural -chink5.ng" earliest published indication of Busserl's attempts to formulate the reclv.etton, he tells us that the epoc e ｧＮｑｾＺｕｩ that the transcendent suppositions arising out of the natural attit.ude (\'Joere the \o!oT'ld is taken Hithout question to be ｴｬｏ ｾＮｴ of theJ.'t1 1i arE: to be llbra:::keted" or llassigned the index 126 125 ) ｩｮＨＢｅｦ ･｛Ｇ ｮｾ ｉＭＩＡｴ in that 1..:e Hmav,:t"' no use of them lt Zdn9IaJ. thesi.:: of the n:Citnl'nl Citt:Ltud8 cecoilws an ｔｾｊＨＳ 127 Ａｬｯｾｽ ｳｴ･ｭｯｬ ｧｾＮ｣｡ｬ a.nd Gi.111it y ft unqu.estior '3d llpredatum!l 128 CEJ..nnot fi:;u. e as an in the cr:.tiqne of' Ｈ［ｯｾｬＱｪＬｴｩｯｮ acco.rrrpli;"h. ti'!::E1T'ei'(Ij:e, by means of the phenoD](3nol0.:;i.cal "ｾ . (. ,'.' re dXt., (, 1C!. .\\ '-.. a.L 0, 'rl ". ｾ (A .',l. +' " f1l), t A .... ｾ .I ") ｾ L." ·t 0 Ｂｯｶ･ｲ｣ｯｊｩｬＨｾｦｬ our n::t tUfa 1. tcndcl1t.:y (In the precise sen38) to "tal>;:o for grant-::d tl the the-sis of thG UpOD vlhlch all our rl3.t l.I'al "ttitllc1G as thE'; nnqne.3 'ionec1 basis ll' ｴｔＧｾ ｡Ｎｊ GndeaVOlU's rest. \'113 are 129 lng to "put it into quostion 1t point.ed out tlw.t th:Ls at ｾＬ･ｭｰｴ base our ｰｨｩｬｯｳ ｾＩｨｩ｣｡ｬ • ｣ｾｴﾷ［ .ｾｴｰｭ･Ｚ It must be im:l1()Ciiately to llovercorne" the ter/iency to . cnterpr.'L:;e on the ＱｾＰｴｵｲ｡ｬ attitu((e 78. posi tiont! 'tm';ards the existen(;9 of the Horld, and it is 8. precisely this and all positing, implied in the term lttbesis H Ｈｓ｡ｴｾＩ ｶｬｾＢｩ｣ｨ EU3serl vlishas to overcome. In this sense, phenomenology claoJ.ffis not to be a " s tandIJoi.nt" or tlposi.tionli but rather to ft • "start ou.t from that 1,r}hich • 130 ｡ Ｚ｟Ｎｌ｟ｾ ｾ ｾ Ｇｾｪ Ｑ ｏＨＭｩＧｊ a1} ..... i'("c' vｃ Ｇ Ｋ Ｌ ｮ ､ Ｇ ｾ ｯ Ｉ ﾷ ｮ ｴ ｣ ｾｽ L·C....... _ 10 _,) e II With respect to the possibility of misconstruing phenomena logy arK1 see :Lng it as a method of:' '\'lorld-dsJJial ｾ i.J er 1 , Co C':.> 11 U i:) •. J t i--tl e 1'.n 1 Ｎ［ｾＺ＿ 'j'r ' ) ' " ｾ .l- ｾ C' 8 '1..1 ..) U ..c:> 't'() c1.. .,ｾ •< for the exi.stence of the world somerlOW doubt.f 11, but <-imply in order :0 ask the qnesti.on ItvJ >al: Joes it meEln to say that tllE":re is a vJOrld'?!t In .:lsk5ng th.i.s, of all our ｮｾｴｵｲｮｬ it ask c-1fte.l' the Lasis after what what is ｴ ｩｾｫｩｄｧＬ ｰｲ･ｾｵｰ ｯ｣･､ by all of our inquires DS self-evident aoJ beyond question. D.<_••.• \ ｾ 1 ｾ'::. ｾＺＮ _ ｾＨ 'J'hat is, i-iS _ .r' ,. ｾ Ｎｾ Ｍ ,) ｾＺ［ .'.'. c r'· .- 0 t .' •• A 6 J-', '" 1.." U ＬＧＮｾ , l' 11 e _ I rJ"_p."" c t -:.:.::..::::. ｾ '-) l, [. Ｇｾｊ ! ＨｾｬＬ ., ｾＮ 4-1-1 L· e do not SCf,'(:isticelly c'tecjY tbe \io:clc'ts eXistencG, 79 .. nor do sceptically doubt it, 'tJe 134 ll t'disconnect it 136 ' 133 "bracket i.t tl 135 but rather \ve simply or " ｾＭＬ｟Ｎ se t it as it "Jere ..---- out of ?S.t iOll" With respect to this Busserl sets forth in his Fegii-tions a vitally important aspect of phen- ｃ｡ｹＮｾＹｳｩＲｾ omenoloJical eX;].ication. He tells us that: This tells us that phenocenoloEY is not, or at the vpry leas attempts flot to be the dogmatic holding of pre establisll'.:d tIe world of as doubt DOl' experience. Als we see that what may apprqr the jnitial exposition of the reduction ｴｨｲｯｵｾｨ comes to be seen only as a davice or method hIe aver -, the tom1enc:? to lea 18 138 whereby the thesi.s of the natural Since this issue of IIdeniallt or Hdonbt lt with respac- to the proceedure of phonomenology is one which gives ris hence to many misnnJerstdndir:gs of the reducti.on and, of the whole project of tha follo\-) ing ｴｾ＼･ we ｬ｣ｾｦ that from a supplamenta.1..'y t.ext to Fusserl' s ｰ｡ｳ ｡ｾ･Ｌ endentF.ll fh.i.loso}'hyl1, is \vorth Susserl sets ｰｬｊ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹＬ ｬＺｾｯｳ ｩ｢ ｬﾷ｟ｴｹ ｮｯｴｩｮ｜ｾ in full. Here, of misundersl.8.ndini(, thG redl1ct:i.o{1 80. relief. He tells us that: If the ｴｨｯｵｾｨｴ is here sugc;ested that this " pre _ lt supposition "Ihich is included in the essential forw of natural life and, especially, in that of the scientific ｣ｏｾｄｩｴ ｯｮ of nature. could 2nj must be " pu t j.nto question ll , theri no da!narre of any kind. is to be Sllpr;osed done by tha t to the proper ｬ｟ｇＮ ｦｾ｟ｌｴﾭ imacx of this l'.fe. l':othinr lies furthr;r fro!;j our intention than to play sceptical paradoxes off agdinst naturalX'D.tional ac:tivity of life Ｍｾ or ｡ｧ ｩｮｾ［ｴ ne:ttllral experience and its seli'·-conf:irmation in the 1iarr,'lOnicus continuation or Br;ainst natlJral thinkin: (and also valUing, active striving) in its natlral methods of reason ing (ard theri?! fore aea in;:;t na tUl'B 1 sc iens e) , and it is not intended th3t any of these be cGpriciated. The germin€ trs. :1scendental philosophy -- let it be emphatically stressed at the outset -- is not like the Humaan and other openly or covertly a sceptical decomposiuion of the ｷｯｲｬ､Ｍ｣ｯｾｮｩｴ ｯｮ and the ｾｯｲｬ､ itself into ficti.ons, that is to say, in ｭｯＨｾｲｮ times, p a ph U.o sop11 y () f It o] 1Jc"r"d 'I. J •. ,L). I,J··]"C'l·n L .. ) J _ .1 on •. J. 1. ＺＮ ｾ l 1,-, As - i f II. Len ｾＩ t 0f ,,'to ltj"()Y'e It '., _ 1 .1.1 .. ｾＮｊ l11:t j s i. t (·"')'C,·,J·i·'E· t .; t.• ..l.. \ I •• J \ .. J a tt dis sｾ r- ﾷ ｲ Ｂ ｜ ･ Ｂ ｬ ﾷ ｾ ｴ Ｑ Ｂ ｲ Ｎ ｮ ｴ ) 1.. - ct c1 . . ....., d ::, which in 30me still senseful ｳ･ｮｳｾ ｾ｣ｵＱ have ｳｯｭ･ｴｨｩｮｾ to do It!tth iJ:I i).s.l.on It does not OC-::1.':' to tr'f!.f;SC2ri.• dcntr..il ﾷｦＮＡｨｪＮｴｯｾ［ ｰｨｹ to dlspUt8 thE=' \<101'16 of' eXY'orier!ce i (J J-l'g:J 1 (Fl.:) t, tota k l3 r rom J. t t. h Ｌｾ ]. ｾ :1 .:> t b .:. t 0 l' the ser; so \'Ib icb it rE a1 ,y 113.8 in tllG ac tll.flll tv c f' '·hc"!·· experhmcG e,n:l. \'vhich i J its h8.Y':ilO[liol1s course c"rti. 5. .c:s Ｇﾣｬ･Ｓｾｴｩ in its j.r:dubi.table. ｊＮ＼ＧｾｦＮＡｬ［ＬＺﾷＮｶｬ｡｣ｹｾ !lrd ｡ｾ ｩＮｮＬ it does not: ｯｲｾｃｬｈＧ to it to deprive ('.bjective truth of po,"itve. sc lenc:c of ｾＮＺＬｨｅ ｬ･ＳｾＺ［ｴ h:1. t of tlw mean ·.ng t1i:3.t it l'eal1y cr(.:<t Lcs itJ the Ｘ｣ｴｬＱ｣ｾ 8:-nplcy.l!18nt O.l. H,s naturally 8vi4ent mathods and bears ｾｩｴｨｩｮ itself as legi.timately valld., Q 139 But of' COLlI' SO:. ｴｲ｡ｮｾ［｣･ｮ､｡ｮｴ｡ｬ ph j losopl}T is of the opinion thrit this SOlise of ｬ･ｾｩｴＺ ＮｮＺＬｱ｣ｹ as it. lTI9tU1'8S j n 311.ell actllA1.i ty, t::; in no \4C\Y ｬＱｄＺ｀Ｎｾ＿ｴＹ｟ｯ thereby, Tlie rlunc:2ltstL.iJablenessll of Hhat ?,oe __ ｾｨｴｩｽＬ｜ out qUE s t i.on j 11 thE} 118 ｴｵｲ＼ＺＮｾｬ cogn it ion 0 f IV!;::: t j s valid in tis naive Evidence is, says transcendental philosophy, not the ｬ ｙ｝･ＮＱｾｳｴＮ｡ｮ､ ｢ＱＰｮｅＺｳＮ of the ｩｮｳｩＨｾ｢ｴ developed ｴｨｲｯｵｧｾ the most radical lines of inqliry and clarification, is not that ｨｩｾｨ･ｳｴ and ultimately necessnry indnbi.ta.bility \vhich JeGt'u,::s Ｚｦｮｩｾｬｊ｡ ｃｲ no llfl8.skecl a.n(l therefore ＭｮｳＨ ＩｩﾷＮｴｬＨｾ､Ｎ questions of t1Ji."I.t 81. fundamental sort which belong inseparably, ｢･ｾ cause essentially, to every theme of cognition ｷｨ｡ｴｳｯ･ｶ ｬｾＮ The whole aim of transcendental philosophy goes back ultimately to those fundamental matters that are unquestioned • ••• 140 Therefore, phenomenology does not in any way deny natural cognition. It docs not wish to change it or alter it. It wishes merely to understand it from the ground up. Natural cognition trilres.J:.2r_..:3yHnJed its 0I,l11 ground" The questioning of this ground by phenomenolozy is therefore not a denial of that ground, but a revealinG of it. The reduction is described in many other ways by Husserl, in his constant attempt to grapple with radically linn Kl.tur81 .8.13e\1 in tCHms ｩｴｾ \,ihose natural conno- ta tins pose:; ser lOllS chLfh:u 1tie s to c lear and unamb1.;:.rtWUS 1)+1 presentaUon. He c:al s :i.t an Habsteilcion v \vhere \Ve ll lL!c2 no 10li,;er keGping in cffoct n the thesis; an ｬｾＮｌｦ 1.1+ 3 llinh:Lbj.tin:;1I , a Itputting out of play!' Ii of the <ire tl 0 universal ｾＨ･ｩ､ｵｪ ｬｰｴ I of \!orlc1.-eXpp.l'ienc8. 11 All of these, we emphasize mean that \·IG no. i v ,:::"t ( of ｑＮｴｾＺ ｓ turn Oul' attention lI ｯｮｾ･ aviay ll uppos .j,nf!. _t.lJe .J:{g.-:li, so ｴｬＭｪｾ Ｌ :1..00. so t'hat .. Agai}, do not IL't from tbE! \'Jorld, (Q1£-l the legitirnate b f21eif in the world) seen r.. §Ｌ.ＮｹｌｬｮＺｾｊｧ 0 1Li5 ttha t Ｎｙｦｌｾ \·i.5?£.1s1 may no·v! be nov.] a rigorous Scienco of Being in the sense described above may be possible, That is to say: 82 .. .. .. .. when I turn away from the naive exploration of the world to the exploration of the self and its transcendental egologicalconsciousDess, I do not turn my back on the vJOrld to retreat into an unvJorldly, and, therefore, ｵｮｩ ｴ･ｲ ｳｴｩｮｾ spec'al field of theoretical study. On the contre: ry th1.s alone erlO. bles me to explore the ｾｯｲｬ､ r_dically and even to Indertake a radically sctentifi.c exploration of vlhat exJ.sts absolutely and in an ultimate sense .. Once the inadequacy of the naive attitu1e has been ｲ･ｶ ｡ｬ･､ｾ this is the only possible way of establishing sc18Dce in its genuine radLcalj.ty -- more precisely, the way to the only possible, radically ｾｲｯｵｮ､･ philosophYe lt j ·8 Uturn our ba.cks l then merely on ho"j the world is in- ･ｾ vastlgated in the exploration of it, where inquiries ｾ｡ｩｶ･ as to the nature of the \'JOrlcl presuppose tlle independent of tho world an, therJ procoed on this jnexpU.c:i t ｯｘｾＮｳｴ･ｉｬ｣Ｎ･ basis. n2:.i.ve or niitur'·.l atU.tllde and ｔｨＨｾ U10 sc:i.Gnces blJilt its are thereby Dot, as the above -Dassa::;e may ｾｰｯｮ ｾ･ｴ｡｣ｩｬｴｮｩ , \'Iholl:.r il1c<.dequa:l>"', out they 81.'e simply in<.:dGquate to the ta 'k that t. 0 oS n e ｰｨｪｬｯｳｵｰｾｹ itself .. ｳ｣ｴｾ j",Le__Yf.J.'X ..ｾｦＮｬｩ＿ ..ｬｾｊ｟ＱｩＮｾｲｌＺｈ ｟ｴｾＮＱｌ Ｙｾ 1-!-9 but Hin a ne'fl \vayll springinr; from a mere We wish in ｰｨ･ｮｯｲ ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹＬ 8 ...1/,;:::... tU£:'l 1. ;) t ..t j ｾ ｬＱｑＮｾ , .. Huss'3/'l rQels that this llnuar.lce ll ｈＨｾＧｲ Ｙｬｩｆｾ･ of s·i.,anc1point t' is absclu.tel: r neceS3S.l'Y and dec ｪＮｓＺ｜ＧＬｬＨｾ for thE.: estA.bl ishj.ne; of the poss150 ibility ot philosopby as Bcience, for it al ne allows phi.losophy to lleseape H t'hat liprc.)uci.:i.cc tt of a 151 :Jcg:ld-beli.::f , Q belief ｾ ＼ ｩ ｢ ｣ ｨ Ｄ as ｰｲ･ｳｾＩｰ ＢＩｯｳ･､Ｌ ｰｨｩｬｯｳ ｰｾｹ Ｎｉ＿ＱＧﾣﾧｄｾｑＡｩｴ､ denies the possibility of a radicality, thereby ｲｬ･ｮｹｪｮｾ the possibility of riforous Science which, for Busserl, we can see why it is that Husserl constantly insists on the importance of the phenomenological reduct1.on. "If we 152 miss tlJe meaninc of the reducti.on, everythi'1e; is lost." This te"ls us at once that, according to Husserl, vJi.t.h9Jl.!:. of philosophy, the of attai.ning Truth is denied, ｰｯｾｳｩ｢ ｬｩｴｹ and therewit , man's life as a meaningful b,ing towards- is doomed to absurdity ｔｲｵｴｨｾ ｊ［ｯｾＭ＿ that \I:e have seen in a gc:neral relation b·?!t\'.sen tho ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯＱＮｯｾｩ｣｡ｬＮ 1:.'&"';/ the rod lcU.on and the It e may now move on to the most common misrepresentation of th's relation. In a rashioD similar to that of Descartes ｾＮｲ･｣ｬ［ ;J..... ＮＺＭｾ J'-ut ｾ J ｯｮｾ . , Husser 1. beg ins the l:xpl ica t ion •• now we ｬ ｒ｣ｾ of tho ｲ･､ｾ the 8artesian doubt. Reflecting on the multifarious POf:3ibi1ities of error 811rl doce-", pJcion, I ｮｾｩ c;ht reach ;:-;uch a dl"\sree of sccIl-cic81 despair that I fi ,ally say: Nuthing is certain, everytb ｾ ng is ('iouiyU'uL Hut j t l.S at once AV i00nt that not evp:c yth inn; is dOll bt fill for "J\'! i Ie I am so judg '.£111 tlHJ1.eVeI"yt.hjrlG is dODbtful, it J.s indubitable that J ,fYj so jnoei.ng; 2nd. it would be absnl'd to \\lant to persist in a universal doubt. And i every case of a definite donbt, it. is ｩｮ､ｵ｢ｩｬｾ｡｢ｬｹ cGrtajl) that I h8. 1]e this douLlt. And Itke\'Jise Yiitb evervv ｣ｯｾ ｩＮＬ｡ｴｩｯ - _.. ｾ r:'L. 1), ｔｨｾｬｲ･ｦｯＬ U exist.enco of the £.QJlitat1.oJJ..:i§. or "acts of G eonsclousness H is indubitable. Tbis much 'tie learned from true sense. In order th1t we may remain within this lndu bi ta ble sphe 1'e ｾ ｾＱ［ｊ､ＹＮ ｴ Ｍ ｮ Ells ser 1 fO:L nmla te s the ph ｓＡｉＮＧ［ｾ ＬｮＱＨＭｕｬｯ ｬｯｾＺ j.ca1. in such a \·;ay a.s to suspend ,jud:-;8l!1ents on the Fe telJ.s us that: o D OLD ｬ｡｣ｩｾｯｬ ｭ･ｴｳｩｰ･ ｯｭｰｬｩｳｾ｣､ (lUj'I"'" ｾ . __. {t cf ,.1: ＱＩｨｾＫ･ｔ;.ｉｲＧ reduction has to in the case of eVGry acc1n- ｢ｾ ･ｰｩｳｴ ｭｯｬ｡ｾｩ｣ ｬ "ort Of' ('nani-l'je" '1"''0.-Ｎｾ 4l,' -Ie>.',vLa c'av.J.. ｾ ,;..:;.J v. eVel'ytn :t.DS:; t t"an,,;ce ndone tba t 1 S IDVO 1veo ［ Ｎｾｵｳ l, IX) bJ'acl\8ted, or be ｯＮｳｩｧｾＺ［ｬ the i.ndr:'x of j ncU.ffwN)nee ｾ of ･ｬＮ［ｩＺｾｴＲＡＢ ＱＰ ｯｧｩＮ｣ｬ Ｎｬ iJ!11.U.ty, an iDc'lex whicL indJ.cat.;?s ｟ｲｪＬｾ •. ＮｾＧ J / I;. f 11.1 0 -" J. 0 . •) .J.. •• ｾｨ｡ｴ tn? ･ｸｩｴＲｮｾＧ of all these ｴｲ｡ｮｳ｣･ｮ､･ｮ｣ｩ･ｳｾ whsthsr I belaive them or Dot, is not here my 6on- 155 By trfJ.n ｣Ｌｾ er::d 8Ilt n )1 J.1 ｾ ...... ｾ r, ,_ ...... t ｾ Y', !C.< v.J.I (I• 'I"_, it to arise, ｡ｬ ｯｷｩｾｧ 1 ::' .".'l ｾ .......... ｾ --::.... C>'.' CfJ ｬｾＧ t· ,. . lXF'L of' cun:v; iOl1.::.ne 58 (i e. ｾ J 1-) .... 1>.. ("..; J ' \.) 0 • ,L. -:.' l... 1•• ｾ 1.... can WA ·t· '.1 't'" {"I' I \'\ • -J.' ..... 'J' '" oJ I .• it L; net a 1. i ved·, .. ..._ ..._ _ ... .,..- ｰｯＮｳ ﾷｾ consc:Lousness ttself. If vie E!xclude that l'lhtch is Q1Ltｬｌｩ､･｟ＧＲ ｾＮｑ ｌ ｊＩ ｳ Ｇｬ･ ｾ (i.e., exclude that \vhlcb is not a real part of consciousness), where are we left? We are left, it seems obvi.ous, with that which is __o.X Ｎｩｮｳｽｾｌ All that is left for considerat.on after the apoche is tbe r(')al ｃｲＮｩｌｾ ｬＮ Ｉ concrete content of the ｰｳｹ｣｢ｩＨｾ pl'OC 55, then. I It is precisely this misrepresentation of the sense of Immanence that lead the inter- ｰｨ･ｮＰｭ･ｾｯｬ ｧｩ｣ｑｬ that phenomoryology was simply an elaborate descrj.ptivc . 156 psyc ｨｯｬ ｾｹ . and tl1er of ore me:c e ly a sub-doma i n 157 rical psycho'ogy, alrt::8dy an f 81npJ ｾ - whicl we have ｩｮｴ･ｲｾ ･ｴ｡ ｬｯｮＬ seen, "wuld pervert. the whole thrust of these :Lnves t.igatioils .. ＱＨｾ｜ may E'oJ:'illulclte thuse ･Ｚｲｮ ､ ＱＨ｣［ｾｮ｡ｲｴ of iDlfib.neLce 8.n1 ｮｊｩｳｬＧ･ｰｲｇｓｦｾｮｴＧ tiV8 enSGS as 101 tOVF = Genujne (teel),) immar::0'nce: -chr. c:1[lcr ::1:.·3 content of the real l psycbic ｰｲｯｾ･ｳ Ｌ ctiscQvaroble thr ugh inner expprience. ｾ･ sha: c a] 1 t his ir;:mD. ne nee ﾧＮｧ ＡＱＺ＿ｾｴ __ｾｅＮＡｔＹ ｾ GenuinE! (l'Gcll) ｴｲ｣､ｬｾ［ｃＺＸｮ､･ ｣ ｾ indicat.ive of tbe IJ.ct t11.9.t th(-) 01 exporlPDce 13 nOG conto." ned in the imn::Jncnt psych ie process as a real part. ｾ･ Shall call thj.s ｴｊＺＧ｡ｮｳ｣･ｮ､ｾ ｣Ｈｊ s 0.n ｾＬ｟ＲｌＦＮ 0 "LJCC't rt ｾ • J 86 .. These senses remain misrepresentative of the phenomenological senses of immanence and transcendr-mce in that their sense is based on the general thesj.s of the natural attitude, \oJ 1:1 It ere II con sci. 0 usn e .s tl and If 0 b j e c t s 1I are t a ken to be, wi. t hout que 31: i on ll , t\vO regions of Be ing i!1...j:h0......l<JOJ' 1i. Taking them (more precisely, ｰｲ･ｳｵｰ ｯｳｾｮｧ them) to be thus I1separatedll in a real s8nse, leads any epistemological 158 critique into sceptical absurditiss .. The omanologi8al reduction does not restrict plR ou' consideration to the real psychic process, so that that which is not a real part of that process (i.e., sen s eone) is e ... the I ｬＡｾ ft ｰｨ･ｮｄｵ･ｮＰＱｯｾｩ｣｡ｬＮ 0 u til.. AsH u. D ｾ e r 1. s tat _s ｴｲ｡ｮｳｾ･ｮＱ･ｮ｣･ ｾ redl).cU.on doe.::; no . . enta·l.. a l.i.mi.L<':It:u:':ll of the i..nvesttsation to tho s';)1-;(;r8 of thJt Hr"l ｌｾＮ［｢ is gCDutrw'Ly e,)nt).ilJed . . I :i.thi.n thE'. abs lut.e this of t.hr.: ＮｾＨＩＺﾷＱＢｊｾＭＨｑ It ･ｮｴ｡ｾｬＺＮｩ 110 l"i..Jllt-lt.i.on to the s ph r: i' e 0 f t h? ｧＮＹｾＺＢ 1. t.!.1..t.i.o.. It e n t:J .U.::; r B the r a 1 im i. tEl. t ion to the s ｉｊｮｦｾｬＧ e of t"tio;:,e t hinr; S l,.lJh i c h aI' e not me·'.'ely spol'-:en ghont, mZ1£:nt Oi' percl<;ver'i, b t instead to the ｳｰｨ･ｾ of ｴｨｯｾ･ ｴｨｩｮｾｳ that are ｾｩｶ･ｮＬ i.n just ex,}(;" 1y Ul(> :;ens(J in \·j(1i-;11 they arc th01J Ght; of, and mOfRover, ｮｲｾ self-given in tho strictest S8nSG .. - in sue): a. ｙｾ［ＩＧ｜ tilot nothing l,'j 11icb is me::U1t fails to be Ｎｮｾｶｪ In words, we are restricted to tlw spl:ero of pu.re evi(Jence. 159 Jlcrein arjsc3 the transformation to the tru.e sense of phen- omena loC"i (;!:1.1 Immal.lcnce. T1Yf'ough th j. s t.ransfor rn.') t ion, "'Ie aT e no langei' .0 ｾＮ to a psycho10gj(),:11. ｣ＱＰＳＨｾＱＧｩＮｰｴｩｯｮ of the sphere of that which is self-eVident, that which is nu.l'_e]Y _ . ｲＨＡｳｴｲｩｾｴ｣､ Ｍ Ｎ ｌＭ｟ＢＮＧｾｎＢ ｾＢＧ ｳｲｾ f' .. [1 i ven _ • sr; We can see from the 0 pa:sage that the ｰｲ･｣ ･､ｩｮｾ phenoITHwologi.cal reduction is not a reduction to Il su bjactJ.vit y ll , . "" by this "that \·I11ich is 11181,).8 0 f me n , i.• e • , 160 psychological subjectivity. We are not restricted to if \ve mS8.n (J::iLCL1"l) imr:l8nent in them and as consti tuting a real part of them. The phenomeJlo1.ogical reduction 5.s rather a reducti.on In exp: icat'ng the full sense of phenomenological v:8 mu.st vcoceed tn tlVO ｉｭ ｦｵＺｊＨｈＩｃＨｾｊ n0 1:J (anrl vi Ｎｳ･ｾ｡ｴｳ i tll ne COS S 8.1.' Y r E! S8 r vat i. on 161 are the f'rst abso1ut.e dat<l.• H ･ｪＬｾ ttlB t say for must ItTh e Ide must saY5 c 9_": i. ｩｾＧｬｪＮ i.n a pr8 ｩＹ｟ｴｾ ＮＺｓＬ Q ' liminary step towards understanding the full sense of ｾｬ｡ｮｯｭｇｮｯｬ ｧｩ｣｡ｬ Immanence, that what 1s given as self- un'orst2nd this only later, ｾｨ･ｮ we come to speak of the Fhenomenulozy dE3als "Jith that. vlhi.ch i<; helVE; been "cleared" ｮ･ｶ｟ｾ［Ｇｦ in of' all transcel',deneies. This c183.ring of 88. transcendencies means wish to that phenomenology does not ｳｩｾｰｬｹ the phenomena in terms of the t \O;h i(;h doe s ｧＹｾ＼Ｎ＿Ｚ Ｑｮ not present itself in the phenomena, nor does it wish to explain or interpret the phenomena by some ､･ｶｩ ｣ｮｯ ｾ･ｲｰ theory or idea. To use a very simple example, we may say in the case of yisu£.lJ... ＿ＮＲＧｾＯｲ･ｰ . .:;ioD. that. phenomenology does not wish to explain this perception jn terms of its cause, e -2-: l'I'. " '--- • ｊｾＧＮｭ ｒﾷｴ : 1.l'r,7;>h·t 0 ...9 _ ＬＮｑｾｶ｡Ｂ｜Ｍ t ｾＧｭ..... ｯｴｄ <? ｾ Ｌ anJd so ｾＬ \. Or.1 • .. ｡ｾ ｨＧｬ • C 'J '.' things (lieht waves and atoms) are not light waves, we perceive objects (howevAr uiequate the theory of light ｾｄﾷＮｰｬ｡ｩｮ ｦｊｾ is in we sew objects .• ＱＬＭｊｨＧｹｾ be ｾｊＮ I tendency to Ｐｕｾ of som p+"j{ I J \..I. • r,f J."" r.ot .I J 1 lit' \lere ll • ( PheDolTI€nological 'tiU'V'CS [-wc1 atolTlE.'" I and described simply as they 162 ､Ｘｰｳ｡ｲｾ t.o \,'1"'18+ "l..'11""·'e"'1 ｾ y c. u 1.ｾ ... '.• J.. inhibit ｌｩｾｬｊｴ ｾ｡ｶ･ｾ ｇｸｰ･ｲｩ ｾ｣･ ｭ｡ｫｾ ｉｩｮｕｬＢｾＧ ::- .::>"l.'.L'c v .... fl r:e,;:>il"g ..., _ J, I... traDsceD6ant suppositjons to b'" \,:;. ll ltc'P.""-t ｾ 1. ...) .... ＸＮｾＩ " ｾｊＬＮ _･Ｂ t.: ,.L t··ore·· ' ｾ . ｲ･ ｌＨｾ Ｇｴｪｯｮ If> mU3 any interpretive construction::. Its ､ＮｴＳＵＺＮｾｉＧ reflect accurat.ely t>e concl'ott.:: ｣ｯｮＧ＼ｊｾＺｹｴ j)t' ｾ cJ ｳＮ ｌｬｙ｟ｳＱＮｾｌＧＺ Ｎ｢ ＺｾｳＮ ｌ ｑｬﾷＺＧｾ __!l.xﾷｬｾＮｄＺＧｾｩｌｳＢＺＱ r 103 0 t :;l'1t) td ptions :nu3t ･ｸｰＨｊｾＧ ionee He may thus arr i ve at a nev) sense of phenomeno-· logical Immanence. Immanence i.s: VIe can therefore f0110\·) Hus.serl \'Jben hE! states:tlOu:r_ plle0.Q.'" immanenO'J .----- ＭﾷＭ Ｍ Ｍ ﾷＭｲＶＵＧＭ Ｍｾ tis eｄＬｴｬｾＺＮｳｊ in tbe tI'lI€ .ＮＹＱｩﾣｉｾＨＺｊ sen '0. re':'cches no fa.,.J:"t1:).P.·.I'__ tl1",,}1J__ＭＮｦｬＩｾｳＮ ｾＮＭ . . .__·_---··- . - -..-...-..-- s.' II The method of the phenomenological reductior has thus lead us to the indubitable sphere of pure consciousness itself, tho perameters of which we have yet to examine. V{e can see th2,t, fiNI ｾ 011':= CR!.lnot that cons _iousnc.ss ･ＳＰｾｉｐＱｴｓ ｲｰ is a real event in the world, nor can on presuppose that llbeing r:;iven \llit-hin consciousness l' implies a 1'8al (;teelJ::.) imlllClnenC8. Such t.l'B.nscendent suppositions as to the nature of consclousnGss have been llsilsper ded". I'Je must no"", descl'ibe and its ｣ｯｮｳ｣ｩｯｵｳｮｾｳ reference to psychological SUvt1 transcendent then, we may say ｳ･ｬｦＭ･ｸｰ･ｲｩ･ｮｾ･ \'lhiclj purport. to malee a claim ｪｵｾｬＺｳ･ｭＧＺ ｬ ｩｴｳ w}lleh goes berond otr experience of ness have beElD \! ｾｬＱＮｓｖｾ ,iled ll conscious- ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬ ｧｩｾ｡Ｇ • Since iva hav, neither eXamined ｾｬｊ Ｎｦ .l is fl COl ta' ned!! in an examination of pure phenomena, nor have we examined ｢ｾ it is ttcontained", our examination of the pU.re phenomena remains thus far incomplete and necessarily misleading. For n01;1, \.! emus t rna ke an effor t not to theor i ze or attempt to explain the data given in intuition. In the of that which is required of us in phenomenologj.cal descriptions. He states that: • • "no inc 1 ina tion is more (b.n:;f1 'OUS. to the II see:n,1l cognition of ｯｉＧｩｾ［ｪＮｮｳ D1d abs-:;lnt.e data tban to think too ｭｵｾｨＬ and from these reflections in thought to create supposed ｳ･ｬｦＭ｡ｶＢ､･ｾｴ prin_iples. Principle.s ','Jhic}: for the most part are not at all explicit_y formulated and hence a.'e not subject to arJy cl'ivique based on tls:::'einsll but ｲｾｬｴｨ･ｲ implicitly determine ,s.nd nn.lustifjably lJ.;::it the directi.on of • - "" ｾ｣ t' , _ ｾ i i '':' (.) -,. H f" ") r;, '\ i t-· . i·:"" ｾ h'" t1" f' 1. rJ \I e." ,1 [,n. ＮＡｾｬ or • ｾＭＡＮ［ｽＳ ＮＱｾｊｽＬＺ _. ..::..'--.J.!. . .;. .ＮＺＩｱｾＱ｟ｦＲ［ＧＭＢｊﾷ｜ _9-_ Ｚ ＭｾｯｳＬ｡Ｇｅ...ｉ -.-.....-.-_. ---_ ｨｾＺｩ ｽ｜ﾷ ... --: . . -.--.------:--.... ｓｴＸＺｾ itS8Lf ｴＮｨＨｾ t,;l s i·: ()f cor,'V?:ctttF ...._ ....._ ... ｟ｾｬＡＱ ［ＨＰＺＮｾ ﾣ ｄｉ Ａｊｾ ｉＮ ｌｃ Ｑ ｾｲＮｬ｟ ＺｾＧｲ［ＮＢｰｮ ('3 ＮＱ ＲＭｾｦｬＧ .t he UIY10r s ·UHJ.Q 1 n ｾ is no to be allowad to interrlpt and to insert it,,,, llD''('der-001c'd ｲｬｾｴ ＮＺ｢ -v_ ｬｾ｜Ｎ ro""p", arroo""yJJ. . \.; } l.Jh .L'he ｬＧｲ･ｾｦﾷｬ ｴＢ ﾷｾＬ ::::1, ｊｾ ,;....... 0118"" and its fIlethod of conversion and exchan;se, based on ｭＨｾｲ･ ｴｲＮｾ［ Ｚ ｓｬｈＢｙ be-r.ds, tos flOt. questioned here. Tbus DS l:i.tt.le interpretattol) as possible, bu.t a.s p u'e an tntuition as ｰｯｾＩｳｩ｢ｬ･ ClllJ,llit.19. 2. i.J]2. ＮｑＹＡＱｬ＿ﾣＮＺ｢ｦｲＮｌｾｩ ｾｮＮｑＩ In f:1 C t? ｾＮＧｩｅｬ '..1 i l"L h ｡ＺＧｾ［ ba c k to the speech of the mystics when they describe the intellectual. ｳ･ｲＺＮ､ ｬｪｾ \,];lich is snpposed flot to be discursive ｫｮｯＧＮｾＱ ､ｧＨＳｯ ｩｾｮｪ tl-;{"J 1;]I)Ole 1,.·,rick ｣ｯｮｳｩＺｾｴ in this ｾＭ to ｾｩ｜Ａ･ fr'c:c retn to t.he s'2c:tng e:'e and to brHCkGt the ｰ､ＧｇｘＧＲｮｾ･ｳ \oIhiclJ go beyond the seeing Clnd vX'e entCluo:;led \;ith ｴｨ｣ｾ serd.ns, ｣［ｬｯｮｾ \·:3.th the entities i-'lhich ara sllpposedl:'{ r:;iven arid tho1J;1:t along \·]ith the ｦｩＳ｣･ＩＮｾﾷＢ［Ｚ＾ﾷｲ and, ｩＧ ｮｾｬ ｹＬ to uJ.'i1cket vlhat is read into tl ef.... through the ｡｣ ｯｭｰ｡ｮｹｩｲＮＺｾ refl.ections. • .J • ('t • -"'I ｾＧＢＮＺ［ＭＮ Ｍ ＭＮ Ｍ Ｍ ［ＧＢ ...l-Vl.,,) .. 1'" Ｎｴ ＭＮＺ ｟ ［ ＭｾＬ Ｎ ｟［ ＭＮ Ｍ L-J..:J C :"ie must remai.n, as Eusserl calls t• .... L-iJ- ",,:.J, ...... it, in Hpu,:'e ｓｕｲＩｾ･ｬ ｃ ｲｈ to the data rpv88.led by the phenom2J101ogi:::al redu. tion, If>7 • < 1.66 91. No theoretical interpretation which goes beyond the data as given is allowed. It is thus that Eusserl estab1isr18S the pbenomenolo{;ic2,l a.ll DrJnc:iDl£.1, ﾣｾＧｩｊＢｪ｣ｩｄＩＮ･ ＮＲﾣ a principle which does not ential that we remain true to P.nel thereby, by remG.ining ',Jit.btn these "limits '!, enslJ.red by the constant rc-:Lnstiga reduction, we ･ｾｳ ',ton of tbG phsJlomenological that: livery statem'3J1t \-Jhj.ch does nothing 0-:01'0 tr an give expression to :-;uch data through merely unfolding (f ao''-JU..;, ｾ ｩｴｾ 't· dCCl1..d '. . , r' -j·c'l· J·h t 'nPl",J. .1','8;'['1 , •••. ,-.Ut> c';,nd ••'. 1, ＮＬｾ Y ｬＬｾ . l.. .. us really, as we have put it in the intro0uctory words oft. his C11 apt G r ｾ 3. n ﾣＮＩｾＡ S_QJ..Vt ELJ?_G.:3..b.!) ':"!.Jf.!.:3. , c; a 11 e din a .......e enu.i no sense to pro'Ii ide foundat ions., a Dr ...j lJr:: :L,p.ium. ' - ' -''l;)' "0 .d', C' ., ｾＮ Ｍ Ｎ ＮＭ ｾ (' 109 "ie must, Den>} push OLU" i.llve.:,tt sation ｦｵｲｴｨＨＧｾｲ and ask ＡｬｾｉＱｂｴ :Ls givon in an analysts of tbe pur .. phcnomena?lt vie must nm4 ･ｾ ＮＸｴ a $E.!cnn::J step at ｬＱＮｄ､ｾＱＧｳｴＸＮｲ､ｩｮｧ ｴｨｅｾ flllJ. sense of pbeno- loenolosical Immanence, a step which shall reveal to us the s'?nse of f! tntel.lticn31 t:carJscendence lt found vij",::clLi.rr the of pbenomenoloi'. tcal IJrJ"Mlf snce • ｳｰｬＩＨｾｲ･ ＹＲｾ The sphere of to an S vi e r t 11 e qn est ion Immanence is the ｾｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｧｩ｣｡ｬ i s ｾ i v en in 11'11 hat l.1'1 El 0 n a 1Y:3 :L s 0 f 'LtJe pure phenomer a?", \l,1e must return and see exae ,ly ltlhat has occured Husserl's phenomenological reduction. ｴｨｲｯｵｾｨ He have stressed only its " ncg2 tive aspect ll • 'JJG must no''') see what it positively reveals. Let us return to the natural modo of thinking J('0',.'1 _ ::1' '- Ａｾ \-) l.'-bC:;3 n,o'if•If)"" .: .i. J-L, J• ＩＨｾｩＧ , mode of' thtnk:i.Lg, recEd 1. <; t.Jn.t a rB.dicc'.lly llnders tancl, not tr",.fJ::;form Hh-::n I uGsire to kno'li about ｳｃｬ ［ｽ･ｴｨｪＬｮｦｾ gained by cuch a that aSS111M:3 ｳｴｲ｡ｩｾｨｦｯｷ､ d eV31ue co ('bjt:;ct befcre fne, ｴｨｩｾＩ I turn to the object for information in a D1arme:c. I also "naively" 0.1' ｳｴﾷ｡ｪＮｾｨｦｯｲｷ､ this inf'OI'f:l3.tion to objects is ｡ｴ･ｮ､ｩｾ to me. In the evont of an error, I merely attend more c los ely tot 11 e 0 is to say along with a ｴｨｾｴ b ,1 e e Ｎｾ toe 0 l' l' Ｈｾｃ t 1'1'"::]5 0 ' ｯ｢ｪ･ｾｴｳ exist of my consciousness of them. itself is taKcn as 0 f t his attcndinz to ｳｴｲ｡ｩｾｨｦｯ､ objects 30e5 a bolief that these ｩｮ､･ｰｾｮ､･ｮｴｬｹ t his err 01"'. All ｈ･ｲ ｩｾＬ as real, conscius- lell to be a real e lent jn tho vlOrld. To PUS) this finally to its limit, we need to say, para- doxicolly, tLat in t1'1c natural atti.t.ude, consciousnoss, 93. as a world-event, is taken to exist independently of itselfJ That is, if, of the natural ｽＺｌｑｬｾ ｳ Ｌ we have said above, from the perspective ｡ｾ the snbject is immanent in the ｡Ｎｴ ｩｴｵ､･ｾ and t.he \'lorld is .tr<!.n!i£Gl.lde.nt to thc_.J5.J:ll?..1ec,t., the subject, as p rt of the vlOrlcl, is "transcendent to itself ll • The phenomenological reduction has as :Lts negative aspect the suspenston of the naive assllmption of a genl1inely transcendent object eXisting independently of consciousness. Yet we must emphasize again the fact that the phenomenological red \lct ion is not a nega t ion, not a 11. • 0 transforr.na tien 170 of the thesis inta antithesis, of pos:.tive into but a SUSP0DSi0D ｮ･ｾ｡ｴｩＮｶ･ＢＬ of all thetic' ju1gements. We do not deny what is giv8J1 it! the natunal atti.tude -- it doe" not but our way of ｣ｨＲｮｧ･ｾ ｶｩ･ｷｩｮｾ wit11 res pee t to its g iii e nn e s .s it changes. ｷｾ j, nco nsci 0 11 S n (-! now view it s;.' ｾ \v i t h res pe c: t to its phenomenological Immanence. That is: .this entire \-Jorld. " • 1rJhteh is c0l1tinu811y Itt-bere for us H , llpresent to our hand" and \ hidl remaj.ns ｴｨ･ｲ ｾ is a ｦ｡｣ｴＭＧｾｯｲｬ､ of which we con· n " to be CO!)fl·CJ.OllS, even ｴｬＮｯ ＱｾｨＬ it ple':-1s"lc'; UO' to put it in hrc.d:ets. If I do this, 3S I am fDlly free to do, I do not then dr-my this ll\wrld lt • " ., do not doubt that it is there. " .but I use the pllenomenolog.i.cal epochc:! • • ". tiEU8 171 And what ｴｾｩｳ phenomenological epoche reveals is that we The phenomenological epoche, therefore, reveals to us not merely our C0Dscious states (i.e., immanence sense one) but also it reveals that we are conscious of Lliye as_ se l.f.., i s ＡｔｉｌＮ ｑｾ ｴｨｾ｟ﾧＲＮ］ﾣｩｬｧｳｌｄ Consciollsness is ahJays consciousness ot By ｳｯｭＸｴｨｩｲｬｧｾｴ ｳｯＮｾｴｨｩｮｧＬ ..t entlorgd.:LB> 172 us ing \']h'3.t appear ed to br- the Car te s ian me thad of doubt? Busserl seemed to lecJ.d us furth'2l' arld further .iD..:s\d§. of consciouSD8SS Hhicll demanded the ambiguous positton ｩｴｓＸｌｦＧｾ of our first step at explicating tho full 1 Immanence. 1':01>1 , at the very h:-'ar t of conse iOllsrle ss, ｬｯｾｩ｣｡ vie ar e , a e of phenomeno- ｳ･ｾ i·J ＬＮｾ t u.t the essence of conSCiOtlSnp.ss C;hOl;Jn is int.entioDaA l.y, ice.? thf.! CS3enc e of consc iousne ss is to be puJ!.s 1,5;'1.e !. the sphere of the pure cogitationes is dispelled through the revealine of the intGntionality of consciousness. Through this revalation, no n ma t tel' of ｢Ｘｾ ｬｯｮｾｰｲ i iruing II • • the epistemological critique i t11 conse iOlJ.sne ss and then by in , at tempt ing to sbow ference or deduction tb's \',1 . 73 c Ｎ ｾｩ ttl§l ＡｊＮｾＺＢＩ Ｎｩｬ ＱｾｌｄｊＺＮＭ ｊＺＮﾧ hOYt w th is ponscＱＷｌｾ ｊＺｾＮＹｓｊ､ Ｑ put.s 1t: Cal sciolisnes3 and the \>Jorld are given at one stroke: 82senttally external to consciou'ness, the wnrld is ne ｳ･ｬｨｴｾＧ cssBGtially relative to consciousness. Russerl sees ｣ｯｮｳ｣ｩｯｵｾｮ･ｳ as an irred lcible fRct Hhich no physic?l.l ｩＡｬ［ＧＩｾ･ can acr;ount foro EXC(:1::,t ｾｲＧＢＺｰ haps the ql1ick, oDscLlre im.?,gv of a burst. "'0 lmmv is to tlburst toward ll , t.o teal' oneself out of tho moist ＹＵｾ gastric intimacy, veering out there beyond oneself. (l 00 175 \'le see then that lie •• conscioLlsness has no Ij_n81c1e'. !t is just this being beyond itself, this absolute ｦｬｩｾｨｴＬ this refusal to be a substance whieh makes it eonseious- 17E1 ness". \'/e must nov} carefully guard ourselves agaiwit vi.ewinG consciousness as Ｇ＿ＭＹｊ｝ｬｾ ｊ ｩ ｬ･Ｎ "/hieh I'has" the "property" of intentionality. To reify consciousness in this manner is to deny its essential nature. 'vle must l"lm'J say, in the most 1i tara 1. sense, c£D.§c Ｎｳ＿ｾｧｄｩＺｬＮＹ［ The llBSQ ｳＮｾ _iDt&D.:.t i9.n.s1 iLy,. 177 of the intentionality of conscious- ｲ･ｶ ｡ｬｩｮｾ also has a correlative effect on how we now view objects of consciousness. We have been shown that any object §J..:.:? l\.no'VJn] ｾＮＢＬｬｦ retGemb8:ced etc. The nai.ve Sllpposi U.on of 'ehe Bxistence of an object ind .pendentl.y of consciousness has bean suspended& We now can no longer speak of the world as it has a sense in ｣ｯｮｳ｣ｩｯｵｾｮ･ｳｫ･ -tile ma.y nOv.l tU.t'n to OUX' qU6stio ll in an ＸＮｮ｡ＱＺＮＬＯｾ Ｉｩｳ ltv/hat is given of pure conscjousness?1l \·Ie are not merely given lle\.:i):;:.ciousness fl in its JT:anifold l,vays of grasping objects. ';'i:le pbenomer;olo!:t,i.eal r'3ctuction limi tation to the sphere of the revealing of the ｩｮｴ･ｾｴｩｯｮ｡ｬｩｴｹ ｴｨＨｾ tic 0 o(cJDtaiL3 no 178 CO.Rtt8.tj O"U ｂ･ｃ＼Ｇｾｵｳ･ of of consciousness, that which is meant or intendAd by consciousness as somet'hing intended (Le., £2. That is to II ｳ｡ｹｾ ｾｮｷｯ ｫ £'2 perceived etc!.) is also giveno the cooitatuIlJ qUEl cogitatum is also given ).n ll the act of consciousness 0 TIlerefore, for example, we are givan, in phenomenological reflection on the act of conse iousness 9..?tylrl£. (Le. '} ｾｹＮｱｨ ｽ＿ﾧＮｳ ｣ｾｬ ｩＮＡｬＬ called not only per- the object is grasped) but also 12.Q.1Tlr.:.- is). AsH usse I' 1 t e 11 sus, 11 Eo. ch cOG ito, eo. ch con sci 0Us bears in itself, in the manner neculiar to the meant its 179 piJI't.icular ;?Q7;o.;.L't.tt..1"JlB. 11 - It :Ls ｾＨｨｴ obj0?ct.ivity f the meAnt the coaitatum's transcendence "".............".•.ﾷｾ｟ Ｑ of ｴｨｾ th:l. S ｭｯ ｾｮ ｡ｲｹ It ... ｾ ............... process whicl} intends it$ So ｾｯｮｳ｣ｩｯｵｳ bear j ng of trar,sce ndence i.n i tse 1.1'11 of the cog ito is not indicative of a real ＨｌｾＮＹｊＩ･ｮ transcendent obJect, nO:L' of a reed. immanence of t'he ＨｲｅＭＩｾＺＱ ＢﾧＮｄＩ . ranscondence Busserl puts it: o • • the; tlTDnSCtwd?nce ｢ＨｾｬｯｮＺ［ｩｦＧｧ［ to t118 real as such is 8. particulQ:C form of ｮｩ､･ＳＱｩｴｹｬｴｾ or, tetter, of a psychic irreality: the irreality of ｳｯｭ･ｴｨｩｮｾ that itself, with all that ｢･ｬｯｮｾｳ to it in jts ｯｾｮ GSSEHjCe ｾ actually or passtbly ma!{:es its a.ppee-ll'El.nce in Ule pur ely phCD0l118 no 10 ｾ ieal . s phGr e of c ansc:i. Ol18<,,,,' v'p+ J't' ｾＱ Ｂ ＨＩ ﾷｬＮｾｮｾｲＭＬ l'tｾ l'S e·ｾ 1 1·dcl"" .1 __ ,. ｾ ... ld ..J t::l··, -= 1. ｴｬＭｾＱＧ t ｾ JlJ'ｬ ｾ･＼Ｇｳ 1 w ｾ d..u ly no real part or moment of cODsciousnes , no real psycrJic Datum .. -L ;:, l r v . • '. 180 oiven It becomes more clear now that that which is -"--=_••..- 97. thereby may that the content of consciousness may be an conscious is part of the same stream of consciousness as that consciousness of it, eog., perceiving as a modo of the coeito). We may also say that what is given may be a are conscious is given as 0 'har than eonsciousnes e.g., the percievecl object as such as a may now arrive at tt2 ＺｾｏＨＬ［ｴ＼ﾷｬＱｮＩＮ itself, vie of clarifying our second ｾｯｳ ｩ｢ ｬｩｴｹ sense of lltranscendenee lt , Hhi-eh, becau39 it is equ.ated ItJi.th the og.::;.i'.;...'JP'.:;;.::,i:.=.:;lfI3SS _ __...... . . . . - - _ of the tra 'JscEJndent obJ·sct. Drovidr:ls us \'1"ith / J- au extens:' on of the ri.'Bld of pheno;Y1(:J[,o1.ogica.l Immanence for nothing vlholly outsi.r1e of cons·-;:Loll:3DE'SS (a Dir1;<::..QJJ.:::.lt91J) t"he transcendent obje,:t is so ello\·! "ina conccioust1cs;j, but e do not moan ｜Ｎｾ \I tI in ll ｩｾ In' hero moans '7 in Cl. the sense of sense I 1\'1 i ｾ･｡ｬ til in our 1"1orGOV81'., the trE.\tJsceu:lent obJ'ec:t has a seruo on} 'y .tn and for consciousness. It ts cor,sciousness ard cons ·,jol1sness alone '·!hich c"InstituLes tho sense of U:e trcHlscend.Gnt objecto This has sequences for ｉｾｵｳ ･ｲｬｩｯｮ ｦｏｬｾ Vitally important nnd ､ＰＲｩｳｾＧ｡ con- p:lOnornenology, vihich VIe can ontlinf; 98. briefly in this context: 1). First of all, we need to note that t rough the revealing of the intentionality of consciousness, we have seen that This has an important consequence. As Husserl say, transc endente 1 pllenoffi2noloE;Y: • " .leD.ves no room for Hme'"aphysical lt Stlbstrll .tux ｾ ings of 8. beinv. lJ,.f.:!hj}1f'1 the be:Lng intentionally constituting ttself 1£1 ar'tual rind -'os3ib1e achievem':?nts of consciousness., •• " 132 This shows us that in Husserliar phenomenology, the whole .9j..ｾｭＮ Ｙ . 2.::., 1'o.c C'(ny notion of a "realityn ou.tBide of tbDt se use is pl'('C t pos ｾ . t1e g iva .0..9X!3.3..51ns<i. Such s ｾＺ､Ｎｹ _De 53 8. rea U. ty beyond all to c onsc lOl1sness (L 8.) beyond t 18 S pbSl'e of phenoJ:1enolog'cal Imr:1anGnce) is and remains i'holly l1nknmm genuine Science is only r i20Pou.S ｴｾ､｟ｳ diately spurious on the p:tl't of Fusserl to defend ｳｰ･ｄＮＺｾ equation by simply saying lITo of a reality of its sense in cO.t1sciousnes[) can it se8ms t.o iaunediat"'ly bias Huss'3l'l's ｰＧｏｇＨｈｾＮ ()n c ill e rill by 0111' ure by ｡ｬＱＰ｜ＧＩｩｮｾ C1 no senso ll • That is, possibJr.; ｱｬｊ･ｾ ｴＺｌｯｮｩ ｺ of llLm tc act\: us lib/hat could rea lit :J out s i () e More of t'nis dif t'icult.y i.n I119lHl ｯｵｴｾ ＺｩＮ､･ OlU' 0 f ｾ ｈａｐｔｬＡＺｲｬ <t rea 1 i t Y Ct sintell l"OUrt belov; t; i;-: j. b1e ? I ｾ 99. 2). A second consequence of this revalation of the inten- tionality of conseiousness is that the "equation" of the transcendent object with its meaning for consciousness entails that as a unity of meanin o , the transcendent object necessarily displays an £3ss.er.!...Q.§. opeD to Sci.entific ｪｮｶ｣ｳｾ tigation. It is this, also, that establishes the possibility of a rigorolJs inve::3tigation ｓ｣ｩ･ｮ｣ｴｩｦ Ｎｾ of BeL g. This consequence as "Joll 1;.1111 be delved . n to in our CTiAFTEH ｾＩＳ A third consequence of the revealing of the intention31ity of cOllsclollsness 5 wl1:i.ch foll is that from our point (2) above us 'nOVJ to OVQrcome a difficulty 'vie J'",ce in ｳｨｯｷｾ j.t \-J3 Science of Boing La be established and maintained, it must remain within the parameters of that which is indubitably given. We went on to say that it seems that the dubitable eivenness of regarded by a ｴｯｲｾ objects must be completeJ.y dis- ｾｲ｡ｮｳ｣･ｮ､･ｮｴ ｲｩｾｯｵｳ of ｓ｣ｬ･ｮｾ Then \'JG \o'ent on lJO ｾ｣ｬｳ｡ HO oes for to nccept such ｂ･ｩｮｾＬ it ｮｯＧｾ seem, then, from these consideroations, t,:;at all of Reality mllst be left wholly out of con::;ir1eration by Husser 1 1 s phenomerlology,?ll llil t illS,,-Q..Q....9_£ i ｳＹｾ ＳｪｾＱ &l)__Ｎｴ ﾣｩｬｾｊ＿ t and ill c ..ＮｩＹｬｊｾＱＮ __tsJ.ｚｊＮｪＺｾ.ＢｊｬＺｃ ......ｾＮｬｴ ｾｊ･ nO'" ...Ｚ［ｾ｟ﾣＲＱｊ＿Ｎｾ It:l.s not Huss9rl' s task to investigate ｰ｡ｲｴｩｾ 100 .. cular objects of experience: this would demand that the evidence acquired by such an investigation remain forever inadequate, as necessitated by the mode of givenness of the transcendent object in yuestion. Eusserl is rather con- evidence or givenness is itself given with full clArity explicHtioDc This "sensen ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬｾｩ｣Ｚ｡ｬ through thereby becomes a "rule lt 2:::; the adequation of evic fOl IdGB in f;fh':;:) our i.nvestieati.on of the ohject. As Husserl notes in t'hs \'Jl:!el'e thE; d.9,tor intui ,ton is of a ｩｦＺ［ＳｊﾧＮ｣Ｇｾｱ､ｕｬ ｃＱＧｬｦｕｾ Bcter, the ｯ ｢ ｪ ･ ｾ ｴ ｩ ｶ ･ factor cannot come to be adeq\.wtely given; 'vlhat can alone be ;;ivcn here is the ｴ･ ｊＨｴｾＮ of such a factor, or of it:; meanir;g And ﾷＺｮＮｯｬｩｾＱ ;,.. ';] ･ｾﾷ｣ＮＺｃｬｲﾷ Ｇ･ｦｴ 0 . · ( .... , •.ｾ ....ＬＢＭ ＼Ｎｾ , and - ......... rul,8 for t)18 ｈ･ｬ ｾＬｯＮｬＺＧ､･ｉＧ ､ CI'{'(,pr'j ences 184 "'"J.h. 1;[i3 -, ＫＭﾷＮ Ｌｰﾷ･ l."l' Ｇｾﾷ［ｬ Ｋ Ｌ .... _ ' , . "_-l "'1-, Q. '1 c..: Ｇｊ ｾｴｏ ｌＧＢｾ1....... II t:pi - of imFlcqLlate ｩｮｦｾＮｊ ｪｩｕＮＢＲｳ • may say then that ｏｴＱＮｾＺ evidence for a trar!sccrdcnl: object t'"' ne ces.sa.r i 1y i.Dade qua to; th is enta :i.l.s tba t the j,lly"§2.tJ:.f'J;lt UW. Science of Being. Brn/ever, the eviJence for our consciousness of an object, i .. e., the transc8ndent oL,ject intentional object is, as a Ｎﾧﾣ ＰＲﾧＮ ＹｊＮ ＭＹＮｾＨ ｴｳＮ 18 ｉｬｾ･ｷｩｮｧＢ 01' ｣ｯｮｳｩ､ＨｾＮＱ Ｇ･､ Ｎｩｬ ＬＱ Ｎｾ ltsensetl, grasped the true domain of a rigor0us 3cience. Thus, Jtsal i ty is not 1e ft. Inolly RussPl'lian phenomenology. It is Oll.t rat.her from the ｣ｯｮｳｩ､ＨｾｸｬＨＳ ｩＬ flperspecti.voH of phcDornenolo[;i.caJ. of cons1.iera: ion by ｔｲｬｊ ｮ｡ ･ｮ｣ ｾ Le., fl'0111 tlle 101. l+). A fourth and final consequ.ence of tlle revealinG of the i.nten t 10n8.1 i ty of conse iOU3ne ss is tha t this r evala!: ion necessitates for Hu.sserl that his phenomenology take on the chDrac tel' of a traDscend'2ntal is II ts e cltw.ted Hi tll its It Ｎｩ ｑｾ ＮＧＺ ｬｩＮﾧＩＡ ｬ object sense in conse iousne SSll, then the object i.s equated \oJitb that whicl H If "v..Jhat the is intellip;ible, that w1'1ich n <1tll:cal fuLfillment of' Huss<?rl1s quest for a rigorous Sci,once. G.B. Madison exh::l1ds this by 'sayinG: that: • • • the idoa of an absolu' e science is the ultimate expression cf the idealistic spirit. Idealism tends to\\'arQ sC''ienc8 as to\.'Jards t.ts 118ttn'dl fulfillment. Idealism DostuJ.atas • • • the identity of the rational and thCl rClal. Bnt if the raU.onal the r'cnl? ｴｨＸｲｾ the real j3 the ideal. This is to say that 'n idealism, rrali.ty can be dealt With only und8r the aspect of' ＬＮｇｊｮｾＩＦ｛ i'lhi.ch is to say Ulat rCi'd.ity nmst be Iildr;alizp.dli. This is in fEl.et preciseLy vJhat Pusscrl is ､ＰＸｓｾ 'lSc:';) .. We have said above that soph A self-consistent Sci0ntific philo- rnuc-t be a philosophy of Inmanence. ｾＧｲ･ nmv see that a sc:!li' consistent Sci'3ntif'lc phiJ.osophy must be an ｾＭｌ｣［ｊ｝Ｇ This necessitates a further essential moment of our description of th.:: natlH'e of a phj loscphy of Imlllcl1Jp.nce. Husserl l s phenomenology, as a philosophy of Immanence, must be a 102 .. We have seen that to find the sense of the transcendant object, we must calIon our experience of the object, i.eet how it is intended or meant by consciousness. Posing the i'011m-Jinf?, question "Husserl seems to cleal 'i'Jith objects for us, but \! hr;.. t of ob,jects in themselves?ll is exposed as an absurdity, for this question can have a meaningful answer, this distinction can first be formulated at all, only in consciousness. That is to say, the distinction between object.s as meant and objects 'i'hich are meant is a manner of different pers1)sctives, 11.Q.:t cl. i-lay of distinguishing beti'Jeen a pllenomena/nour;1cna disU.nction as in Kant) e CnG of thesa indi.cates tbe ,']' .l'" e, s < ,,,r 1 .;v I ) n ' cessarily while the other (obiects which are meant) indicates the ｾｾＢＧｾｕＢＢ _ _""''''_ _ "",,''_._ _ ''''' ｾＧ _ idea of the possible perfection of 8videnc3 with respect to 186 ttl e 0 b j ec t 0 AsH u C' s e l' 1. '. e11 sus U."l t 11 e Q..str t Ｎｾ［ＧＺｩ｟Ｒｬ HQS;ltt 0..t j.-9.X2,2. ｾ The reference to harmonious infinities of further possible experience, ｳｴ｡ｲｴｩｮｾ from eaCl world-experience -- \-Jrlere "··lc tuaJ.ly ex.i.stins objeet ll can have sense only as a unity of meant and mennable in the nexus o· ｣ｯｮｳ｣ｩｯｾＳｮ･ｳ Ｕ n unity that would be ｮ･ｶｩｾ itself in a ｰ｡ｲｦ･ｾｴ ･ｸｰｾｲｩｮｴ｡ｬ evidence -- manifestly sigrd.fj.es that an ｩｬｳｾｴ｜ｊＮｆＡＬＢｬ ObjAct ｊＩＨＭＡＱＮｯｮｾｩ ｳ to a ｜Ｇｩｯｬ､ｾ 0 • all the moraso, ｴｬｾＺ ＬｾｩＧｊｯＩＺｬ､Ｎ［ ｾｪｊｳ＿ｬｌＮ｟ ｩ ｌＮＲ ｌ in f tD..:l t Li) e <1.'1..-_ r Ei.1..ＮＩｾＹＱＺｌＨＮｾｴＱ ＮＰｑｭｾ ＩＺＧｩｬ ｾＡＲＮ ｾ ＲＮＺ ｊ ｌｲｳｬＮ ｮ ｙＮｬｾ ｑＮｴ combinsble exneriential eVidence a comnlete svnt: esis of possible cxpericnces o 18'7 ＢＬｾ ..... .r._ ..... ＮＭＮｾ｟ ......................_ ............._ _ ...... _..-.. .. ｟ ｾ ......... ｾ _ _ ..... , J- v It is thus that the reality of the acttlally existjng object 1.3 equa.tecl. \iJith the sense it has fo.l' consciolu:mess ( this 103. sense as intentional object, being ｯｱｵ｡ｾ･､ with the idea of perfect givennecs). Herein, the transcendence of the real object becomes an "irreal ll or lIintentional" transcendenc:e rather than a real (r.gell.m) transc:erdence. It cannot br3 emphasized strongly enou6h tl1at t.his procEledure on the part of Husserl does not eliminate or dissolve the difference between objects as meant and objects reither does tJ.-.is realizaUon of ｣･ｮ､Ｈｾｮ｣･ｮ ｾｨ･ ｷｨｬｾｨ are meant. t1intentional trDns- of real objects fl§.,l1y. their trans:::endenr:e. It merel.y defimls their transcendeEce in a manner HhLch avoids epi s te!110 log ica labs urd i t i'3 so J n fact, QIl.'L..£.ou lrl .:'iP-..x.....:tJ2Qi.. against a p3ycholot?,:Lstie ｾｌｲＬｴｳｲｰ ･ｴ｡ ｩｯｮ l;ui:;'n vlo"ld lCClve kno'illed?,e 'dhich demand, if they are car:ciet± to their 10f;ical 188 corjclusion, the ｾｌｅ＿ﾣｾｩ､ｬ 9_f ｴ［ｲ｣ｬｾｄＲＮｑｮ､Ｂ＿ｊｹ or its mere theoretical postulation. It is in this context that we can see that the ｢ｪ･ｾｴｩｶｹｬ phr:aS0 "turn to s ,·]ith respect to FusserJ.ia-l P11 enom \:) l't 0 log Y is:'.. j, s 1 ｅＺｾ a cU, n:; 5 for i t doe s no" e n ail n t I) r n qUl?stl.on f hOi'] t" is cxpcric-'Dce can " con tact ll anothf-J:' pcut 189 of the world, i.e., objent, C2L be validly asked, rather a turn to even psyc Ｚｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ ｴｲ｡ｮｳＬｾ･ｮｊ･ｮｴＮ｡ｬ ,but 0xpe.riuncE:, w thin \'Jhich subje:::tivity and experience themselves are found given as a pal'ticula.r :- ｮｾｬｴ｡ Ｚ［Ｎ of the p.3.rticulDI' mode of the cog ito common 1y called logy indicates$ that ｩｳｾ iIj!1€' r hfD.Q ':'l.. Phenomeno･ｸｰｾＧｲ turfl to p'lre-'l&l2.ert£!QSEl (an CJ. ｴｲ｡Ｎ ｊｳ｣ｅＮｾｲ､･ｮ｣ exp3r iGnce tIc leared II of all presupposed but not cleared ｧＬｬｾ 0 in pIt'e experience, ｴｲ｡ｮｳ｣Ｚ･ｾｩＬ ies, for ＮＹｯＺＧｾ ｴｄＮＩ ,Ie find, TlU.2. remains misleading only if we contifiue to consider (as is precisely natural to do) experience as a real part of nature and thereby is given in transcendental experience. As Huss8rl states: rrhe decisive poi.nt in .;1:1i8 confusion • • • is :1:1e cOfli'ounding of tbe eGo \'l i th t.he ｬｂｾＨｲ ty of' the I C)s hUfJan psycb(::1. One -:108S rJot see tbat the t·'·ll··lr>h .; ｾ <:In''(,:lr·t-c)d Be o. " 1'8"] J' ·I-l',f v al ｜ｾＮＬ ｾ J.J ＧＮｾ '... C ."ready corJtEt.ins 2. sense··u:oment j:ertainjng to eX"ernaU.ty (the SI:Jo.t';'(11 \'101.'16., Ｑｬｾ t1at every ･ｸｴ･ｲｮｾ ns,r"l',c' ｾＩ ..... to: ,; n (r'1E·l·· .. ｾ ［ .... ＮＺ ｾ ):' ·) Y. _ ..\...;;.. \",....... ' .. _Ct •• _ 0.-') '>..J • .hns its place fram the very ｡ｬｩｴｾＮ ｢･ｾｩｲｭｩｮｧ of the ego -_. its Iil5.ce 7 ｮ｡ｭｾｬｙＵ as ｾｮ intenti0Do.l pole of experience, which itself (.:,iith the \'lhoJ.8 sLrea:n of i·IO.l'ldly cxperien:-':8 ｡ｮｾ the ex is tent that bCJcome oS hAl' monions ly coni' l.!.' med in \.Jor lcHy expor iene e) bo ｳｾｮｯｬ to t.he irlS ide tn l")ure trJt:' ｾ ntEH'na ｬｩＮｴｾＧ 0 • H 190 It is thus seen that psychological misrepresentations of ｰｨ･ｄｯｭ｣ｮｯｬ ｾ ｲ the aims of conti tutL"! the most overpower iDe stuwblinJ block to the entran"e iato the transccndentsl problem··::iI,here, for it speaks of "snbjecti ,ttyH ani " exp- Gl'ience tl <.:.n;. thereby it can mislead us ard turn us ｾ a rl .'-\J # ,-l, from ｵｮＱ･ｲｾｴ｡ｮｪｩｮｾ of) the true and genuine sense °1 philosophy it is Jecisively impor- For (on of ｴｲ｡ｮｳ｣･ｮｊ･ｮｴｾ｝ .j- D':lay Ｔｴｾｊ ｾ v r . 0 1,;..;,.:, r'\ f' '...,J":" ;..VIh It.. Cl (' " J. ..., ct...... "c' t h ｴＮｾｉ ,. ., t , not only humalL0.l':;8pisrr! but also ｾｌＺＡｦｕ ｌｉｾＲＮｊＺ［ｩＲｾ h I ' t'1 .... /. ｾｊＮＭｴＺＧ .....ｾ ｬ ｾ ｾ h,., 1.' ,- :1' ｴＺｾ "r"1.'1. (DO 105. ma.tter how purely the human psyche may be a.pprehended by internal expeL' ienee), a1' e 1iJor.:.l.Q_lY concepts an', as ｾｯｲｬ､ ｹＬ Qlply only to objectivities of a ｴｲ｡ｄｾｮ､･ｱＮ｟ﾧｬｊ＿ｽﾣ｣ａＩｪｯＬ vJhich therefore are in luded, as constitutional problems, within the universal transcendental problem, the problem of the transcendental corstitlltion of all trans end.encies, nay, all ob,ject:Lvities of whatever sort. 192 Saying tba t psycholog ieal expel' iene e iriVolve s a ｾｲｭＮﾧﾣｮ､･ｄｴ fact an ob..iec.tiyj.. 1.z, Le., a ttspecial object tl among others It 1s only from ･ｸｰ ｲｩｅＮＧｮ｣ｦｾ (nov.: II eenll in its purity, devoid of transcendent apperception which would fo:e only by thE: appearaly:e of tranr-cenJency II can it hEive any sense for us. Busserl, in his inll cxper ｩｅｾｮ｣･ ｬｾＹｲ Ｑｬ ｩＮｌ ｑ ｮ､Ｎ elaborates on this: Experi erice is the p'?r for ｭ｡ｮＺｾ e in \>Jl. ich for me, trle ･ｘｉＩ･ｲｩ･ｮ｣･ｲｾ exnerienc8d beina: ilis tterc i1 and is there as what it is, with the ｾｨｯｬ･ content and the ode of be i.n!; thv t experienec itself', by t1Je pcrformance ｾｯｬｮｧ on in its intsntionality, attributes to it" If \'Jha t is expel'ienced has the sense of II trans ｾ cenclent" bejng 5 t1'lcn it is tho exreripnce that constitutes this sense, an:-} does so eittler by itself or i.n the ","',ole l:Jotivatlonal nOXtlS pert.c,ininr:; to U., ani helpiDf; Iiln.l{e uJl its intention<=llity. If 811 rxper'ien e is imperfect, if it ｭｾｫ･ｳ the intrinsically ･ｸｩｳｾ･ｮｴ object appear only one-sidedly, only in a distant ｰ･ｲｳｰ･｣ｾｩｶ･＿ or the ｬｪＮｾ｣Ｌ then tl e experience itself as this CUl'rent mode of consciousness, is t.hAt ｜ｊｬ ｩ｣ｨｾ on boice ｣ｯｮｾ｜ＮＱ ｴ･､Ｌ tulls lilO so; U. tells ｊｔｉｦＮｾＺ Here, in tl":1.s consci.ousness, something is Ｇｾｩｶ･ｮ as l.t itself; I .. ｾＮ 106. but it is more than \oJhat is actually itcelf Ｈｾｲ｡ｳ ed; there is more of the sane object to be exnerienced. Thus, the ｯ｢ｪ･ｾｴ is transcendent and also· in that experience further tells me, it could have been an illusion, though it presented itself as actual anrt as itself seized ｕｄ｣ｮｾ . 193 It is thus that the intentionality of consciousness ltallovJstl the intentional object, which is intended as being more than is actually a,iven seo. 194 jn tbe present moment, to a:Jpear. J this cor ee cup before me and I than the it as being more ｾｲ｡ｳｰ perspective which I am now experiencing. ｰｲ･ｾ ｮｴ It thereby "e;oes beyoncP' o.t' lItransce ds!! the present aetl1al experience by virtue of the intenticnality of consciousness itself., open3 up a horizon of possible Ｈｾｯｮｳ｣ｩｯｌｬＮｭ･ｳ \hich I can undergo in the ｡ｸｾ ｲｩ･ｮ｣･ｳ Ob,'icct, ･Ｎｸｰ･ｲＵＮｇＺＱｃＨﾷｾｓ may fLllfDJ the intention I 'nave, ｶｊｾｬｩ｣ｨ We see of this ｩｮｶ･ｳｴＧｾ｡ｴｩｯｮ that: ｮｯｾ Whateer I en.ounter as an ･ｸｩｳｴｩｮｾ 1bjeet is samet .ing that.o • ｾ｢｡ｳ received its Hhol_? ･ｳｮ Ｍｾｮｩ･｢ from me and from my effGctive intentionality; not a shadow of that sense ｲ･ｭｾｩｮｳ excluded fr m my effective :i.nten ,tonality. J reci.sely tlds I must ｣ｯｮＳＱ ｴｾ I must. eX}jllcate sYstematicA.l].y if J intend to mdcrstand that sense an'.'l consequently to understand also \·J'1at I alfJ. a1.1ovJec1 8.nd to an object e o • • V!!l9t I arfi not allo1ded to attri1::m.te 195 This; ｢ｏｩＧ ･｜ｊ Ｚｾ can easily be misconstrued tbe poss i bi li ty of ｾｌｴ｟ ﾣＮＹ ｙ ＱＺ ｙ t. (> for it seems that poss i bil i ty of .L.t.Q.£. and the possibility of .'lQ.Y.£1..t.Y have' berr.: \'Jf1011y eliminated, and that the performanJe of the ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ reduction has left ｬＰＷｾ us with a world emptied of the need for explication. This is an easy error to fall into with respect to Busserl's phenomenology. ｾｨ｡ｴ is needed, in order to avoid this error, is a disCll.sston of the notior, of llHorizon ll in Busserl' s phenomenology. Before we begin this explication, let us summarize what we have from our study of Husserl ｬ･ｾｲｮ･､ thus far. We ｦＰｾｲ 3'8 now in a pos'tiOD to recapitulate the definitions we have arrived at and to understand their sign i f ｩｃ［ｾｕｬ･ ｾ Real Crcel1) trD.nsccndencC': ｩｮ､Ｎｩｾ｡ｴｩｶ･ of the fact tt'lElt. '-he object of ｣ｸｰ･ｾｩ･ｮ｣･ is not contained as a real pRrt of the real psychic lmm81v2nce· of consc ＱＮＰＡｬｓｾ ness. II" is "outside of n (it transcends) the experience. Flea 1. (r.e€) U ) immanence: the concreto content of tliG l'8Cl_ process with itself js 2 real ･ｶ ｾｴ ｩｾ l,he viorld. Psycl)olo,c;ical ｳ ｵ ｢ ｪ ･ ｣ ｴ ｾ vi ty·. nsvclJic Immanence: that which is ｾｩｶ･ｮ in consciousness. As we have seen, the first absolute data are pure ﾣＹＮ Ｚｾ ｴ ｑＧ ｪＮ ｑｮＧﾧＲＮＬ bu.t on examination of theso, \H'! ､ｩｳ｣ｯｶＨｾｲＬ tbroL1gh the revealing of th8 intentionality of consciousｮ･ｳ ｾ that ldi.thi.n the ｾｰｨ･ｬＧ･ of ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｲｬｯ ｧｪ｣Ｌｾｬ Iml1l8.nencl? is found lIirr(!al fl or ltintentional" transcendencies. ｳ･ｮ Ｈｾ it l.s that ,,,rhich is given in ｣ｯｮｳｾｩｯｵｳｮ･ｳ bu.t given as other than col1!';c:l. usness. The intelitional object.9.h!2. intentional. Transcendence: in the phenomenolo;ical 108. We can now see what it is that Husserl means by the seeminG ly contrad ictory sta t0ment 196 II tra.nsc endence \'J1. th i.n • "'I'ransc endence ';1i thin immanence" does not immanence" mean that -withtn consciolsness as a real mental process outside ｳｯｭ･ｴｨｩｮｾ that ｯｾ is given. This will lead ｰｲｯｾ｣ｳ eventually to a Humean scepticism as to the possibiltty of knowled3e. 197 It also does not mean that within the sphere of givenness, somethjng non-given is assumed .s existent but unreachable by consciousness. This will lea' to the self--contradictory difficulties of a Kantim.1i a ｒｩｮｂﾷ＼ｈＺＭｾ］Ｎｳｪ［｣ｑ a l' l! g i v GE .. 0. nd ･｣ｮ ､ ｾ｣ｳｮ｡ｲｔｉｬ eH e By tt:us :cemaining ｮｯｩｴ ｳｯｰ ｾＮｬｓ of ':Iithin imclnnence" means, g:L I] (-3 n a sot h r r t h fl ncon.s c i \oJ i 0 usn e s s i t s e 1f • thin the .ren 1m of pure phenomena, \'.'8 see thAt liThe relat.ing-itself-to-transcendent-t ings, whether it is meant in this or that. way, is still a f.ature of the phenomena." 198 Therefore, when we come to interpret t.he Datural phenomenal gieal Immanence as a (seen nov) as a ｬｩＮｴｾｪｦｑｙＩ ＭＮＬｾ .ODS t "'J e see t. h. t the y do illJ 2 b ,j ｶＮｩＺｾ Ｈ ｣ｯｮｳｴｩｵｾｪ i t.uted Ii 0 TiS ＬｾＭ vc \.. . 0 lor: i CCt 1 t pa r a 11e 1 g:i. iJ en a nO. "Chat ts to S8.V, they are disti.nguished in so far as tlmL t.ley nre giveL. '1'110 fluesti.on cJS to ｾＡｬＧ＿ｴＮ｢ｾＺｲ｟ＨＮ ＡＧＺＢ Ｎ ｑＹＮＺｴ is g i von is exposed <:tS a.n a bs urd tty tbr ＨＩｾｬｧｨ transcendency the reveal inS; of the intentionality of consciousness. Now we can see how . it i.s Dossible even to sneak of an Itilmnanence T{)lthin . vity HS real) as \<Jell as a tltransceuJonc:e ,.;ithin Immanence!! Ｍｾ that now, from the viewvoint of ｨｾｵｯｮ･ ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｾｯｬ ｧｩ｣｡ of psychol03i_al subjectivity and the reality of .i? n.Qt ＼Ｌｬ･Ｎｳｾｊ ｩＡ Ｙ ..• They have merely ｢ｾｇｮ ｯ｢ｪ･｣ｾｳ llpurg9d" of c.l self- contradj.ctory interpretationarisiJ.g out of our natural attituC\e (Le. ｾ our inherent tendency to presuppose ';he as t,]cj.stsn:t; i3.nd \110:(' lei to interpret tl nature of G coriSC j ｯｵｳｾﾷ ness arid thG natu!'G of reality on the basis of V'lis ＱｾｪＹ ｡ｴＬ ｩｴｵｾＱＸＩＮ Nm we enn see also that Hlsserl ha, moved beyond (Flnc1 subsGquently ･ｮ｣ｯｭｰＸｳＺｾ［･､Ｉ any sphere of a possible mundane epistemological of re81 psyc ho ｾｯｬ ieal ｰｲｯ｢ｬ･ｭｾＮｬ ｴＮｩ｣ Stl bj concBl'fjin:; the !'relatIon" ec t tv i. ty to reD 1 tl'ansc8n rlen ee <> As }link notes: ｃ｡ｊＮＧｉ ｹＢｩｮｾ Ollt, tbe epoche moves the ohenomenologica 1. problcmntic out of the ｲ｡ｮｾ･ of the apparent problem concertJ ing ｴＮｨｾ 1'e la t ton of psychica 1 il:1manenee and transcendence into the ｡｣ ｲｵｾ｡ｮ｣･Ｍｲ･ｬｒｴｩｯｮ between the \-.'orJ. in', tfl totnli ty (G.nd hence, both lmJl1anpnce and transcCf:"1cl-lce) and transcE'lla.ental ｳ ｵ ｢ ｪ ｣ ｾ ｴ ｩ ｶ ｴ ｹ Ｎ 200 As we sha 1 see ｩｾ ｾｯｲ･ detail below, point as wi j.ch we can validly speak of ｴｾｩ is ths precise ｰ｢･ｮＰｭ･ｮｯｬＧｾｹ , . as reID s 110. concerned, not li1ith merely tracing the ""'onditions for the possibility of l{nmiled:?;e of ｾｨ･ \>I01'1d back to a sub;ject vJbit:h is itself seer, as part oj:... ::'11':: vJ01.:Jd, as could be concerned, as is Kant, with ｴｲ｡･ｩｮｾ the world back to its tlsource" in the il!orld-forrn (Le., the c8.te.c:;ories). This as \'ie11 stands as a mundane attempt, for the \'Jorld-form is itself the form 201 ＺｾｌＹＱ ｬﾷ ｯＨＮ ｴＮｬ Ｒ｟ｶｌＹｾ［ｊＺＮＹ Rather, phanomer,oloGY is 202 \l. 1. cLJ t £D1LiD-o f . t .o!£._J'} Ｚｬｾ｣ ｬＲＺ Ｎ ｌｴｾｬ ﾧＮ and is thereby s..QJ f ｾＧｃｬ ＩｑＧｬ Ｑ ｡ J_..I.... after the ｣ｯｮｾ･ｲｮ･､ ..c... _.?:>, wl·th ,'i. ｾｰｦ･ｾ ｬＧｾ･ ..' -' .t. • } _" .. to a psycbologistic epistemology, both psychi. immanence and and including, vlith l'ef.erence to reo- ｴｲ｡ｮｳｻｾ･ｄ､ｾｬＮ ｣Ｚ･ Through the revealing of the intentionality of conse iOl1sne .'35, shOVJfJ \:'0 us ttlr':::'\lgh the ＮＬ ｾ l' .lONi1ance of tbe are t ''/- 1 vC ｳ･ｮｾ［ＨＭＡ • lfJ n:i.slet1c1 by V'i,; • cons{.' lOll.SJ'Jo:JSS ｲ･ｶ｛ＺＮ ｌｾＮｴｩｯｮＮ • r .NG ｴｾｭｓ t 5 not be "'his d09S not entail thnt the world now becomes one devoi.d of the need, for explicstion and lll. .. of the posf>ibility of novelty or en'or. ::le need to recall the epoche the ｰｨｇｮｯｲｮ･ ｯｬ ｾｩｳｴ .tway commands a horizon of obviously possible new proje:ts; a transcendental field of work d083 not irnmertiqtely sprea1 before ｨｾｭＬ preforme' J..n a. set of obvious types . . . . . • • • by carrying out y no mJans ｳｴｲ｡ｩｾ 203 To fully understand this, we need to come to see how it absolutely decisive in an understandine of the unique character of ｾｵｳ ･ｲｬｩ｡ｮ As Pusserl tells ｰｨ･ｮｯｲ ･ｮｯｾ ｧｹＮ In order to brlflg tl,!s highly fle"::ibl12 alre,11.y spokGn. Since ｴｨＨｾ ｣ｯｮ｣Ｈｾｰｴ of horizon phcwomonological [;otion of horizon bears in itself so many posoible applications and ramifications, many different apl'!'oa ,hes to V,is notion are re205 ｱｵｩｊｾ･､ to ｢ｲｩＡｬｾ out its full ser13e of.! its many ltVJvel:,;tl of op8rationG 112 0 It seems that to begin with we must, as jn all phenomenologi_al investig3tions, re-cover some of the ｡ｲｾ｡ｳ of whj.ch we have alreaJy spoken. We have seen thnt the belief in the independent extstence of' the \oJor1:1 provides the 11l1ve;:osal "presupposition ll oJ.' t'borizon ll of all ex)licj.t :lets tn the natural at.titude. ｾ lIHorizon" in this initial sense is used to mean thHt acts of the natural attitude fall attitnde anrj are ｬ ･ｮ｣ＨＩｭｰ｡ｳ ｾＺｬ 11 this inexplicit ｉｴＭｾｬｩｴｨ Ｎｮｴｬ by itl!" ｈｵｳｾＺ［･ｉＧｬ E>:i:nands on It is tilis Ltrd.ve.::'sal '31:,ound of bnl··.8:f l.IJ 8. v.!orld '·iY.d.ch all praxis presupposes, not only the praxis of ,life, but also the ｴ ｨ ･ ｾ ｲ ｯ ｴ ｩ ｣ ｡ ｬ prixis of cognition. The being of the worlj i1 total.ityis that whic is not first thf' r'Jsu.lt oC> an act '.vity of' Ｎｪｵｲｬｾ･ｭｮ｣ but lhj.ch fOl'ms the pJ.'enlpposi.tion of all. ｪｕＰ｛Ｇ［･ｭＹｮｴｾ ［ｾｑ Ｚ＿ＹＩｾ ＹＮ ｬ ｾｉＮ ＰＭ ｟ｾ ...9):J<t?, .-'::}Jl c. ｾ . ｾ.ｌＺＮ ..Ｌｕｾ＿ＺＮＡｉＰﾣ ＮＳｦＲｾ ｊ ｆｴＬ＿ｓ _Ll..,,!;J) e !.TI2.j,D__ｒｴｌﾷＮＹＬｾＺｊｌＮＲ iJ.J:.Y......9 ( .. ｕｾＺＮｨ .f..L ; :i. t j, s n() t: a c qui ｊＮＢｾ［ d by 1r 8. spec5f"c act which breaks into tho continuity of life as an Mct 'which !)osits ｬＩｲＮｾ j.111 r ;-';1:'CiSPS the existent r E"VPl.! ;\3 ':In Ｎｧｲｾｴ of ju:1.:,-'ment ｳ･ｾｩｴＺ｣ｌ､ＩＨｲｰｨＭｊ exi.stence" All of' tbe.se p.cts a .rl:l<ldy pres:.i.!Jr:o::;e corl ciousl1ess of the world in the certainty of ｢･｝Ｎｩ｣ｦｾ If I ｾｲ｡ｳｰ in its ｰｒｲｴｩ｣ｬｊ ｡ｲｩﾷｾ Ｎｹ some object or other') in my i'j eld 1.. of p9l'('eptioD, for e·'C2.mple 5 il ｬｯ ｫｩｮｾ at the bc.'ok restjnE on thp table, then I srasp something ihich for me i.s cUI ･ｘｩｳｴ･ｮ ｾ ｳｯｭＲｴｬＺｩｮｾ in advafJce \'!8S al1'8ody W' T If! leb, as aJr<'>-';dy existin<,; here H in my Ｌｾｹ､ｬ ｴｳ ｮ･ｊｾ thoi.1Zh my attention ｾ｡ｳ not yet Ｑｩｾ･｣ｴｇ､ tow3rd it. In exactly thc samo viD.Y, j',' i.s enL·ire s-:nc1.y? llihich nmJ h8S e t'2red my field of ｰ ｲｾ･ｰｴｩｯｮＬ witt all its objects ｷｨｩｾｨ perception throws into relief, was already there for me, together wit.h Uw Sjo8 of the room is not in ｜ＮｶｨｩＨｾｨ viC\'!; it 'rlas 3.11'Gady ·thern vlith i.ts famiU.n· ｴｨｩＮｮＧｾｳＬ imbued '/lit.h th(') sen39 "roo'll jn my hallS!?", trp. later beim; on UlC famili3r street, UL street in my tm ｾ｜Ｌ c nel so on. ｬＱＳｾ Thus, all existents whicb affect us do so on the ground of the world; they give themselves to us -s existent presumed 8S sncll, and the activity of cognition, of judgement, aims at ex mining ｾｨ･ｴｨ･ｲ they are truly Sl1,:h as th2Y git-e themselvGs to be, as they are presumed in advance to be; whether they ｡ｲｾ truly of such and snch a n8 tur e. ThG vlor 11 : : s the e;{ is tent vJ 0 7' 1d._L? ｾＮ｢ｩ __\2Jl i './ ｾ r ＮｾﾧＺｌ ,I@:-;>"s I'V-e'-:p r t;; j- Ｍｊｾ｟ ＲＺｾｲ［Ｇｩ 8 11 -. judicative ｅｬ｣ｴｩｶ ｴｹｾ •• ｾ s--o'f 206 This then the natl11.'8 of the natu:cal attitu'13 for ｲ･ ｾ｣ｬ･Ｎ ｪｮ･ｳ us. It is precisely this implcit basis of all judicative activity relating to particular objects wlich daf nes the themselves as "believed j.n" or· itatt .neled to lt as being some olJject 3.11;13.Ys \'lithin the tnexpU.ci t universal './ol'ld20? ｢ＸＱｾＮｅＧｦ Ｂ And it . s preci ely this th::lt is ｜ﾷｊｯｲｬ､ﾷｾ｢･ｬｩｯｦ I pnt into quest:Lon lt by the pbenomenolr:>gical reductiono Thns, when we come to a particular object, we must ｩｮｶ･ｳｴｩｾ ｴ･ nhoJays v.l.mv It in tl"lis and \vith rospect to this "horizonH within which it occurs and which defines its very sense, 203 j t?__ＮＧ＿Ａｉ ｩｾ ｬＭ｟｡･ｶ a3 ｡ｾＭｬ object in the v!Orld. Thts questi.oning lnads us into ｳｩｴｵ｡ｴｩｯｮｾ QUI' (l pardoxical most common and Datu:cal orientation ｴｯｷｾｲ､ｳ the oJorld is one w},ich is dir€cted tOvJelrds particular objects in that vlorld. Hussr:rl notes al.ways already ｰｲ･ｾｩｶ･ｮ 1,118' liTho \'1Orld as w"ole is in passive cert.itude, and the ortol... t- ation of cognition towelr.s n particI1Rr existent is ｧ･ｮ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ ｹ 209 ｭｯｲｾＢｊ primordial than towards the ,'Jorld as a \.tiho ｾ･ •• 11 114" We are thus lead, as we have already pojnted out, to a realm of unf'lQlil ｩ｟ｾｬＧ i t;y throu0"!: tbe putt in;.; into que; s t ion of thts universal \·Jorl.d-belief. Yet, in a sense, 'He could say that the phenomenological reduction leads uS to that which is most primordial, to th t which, 210 it in the natural l!. • • ＸＮｴ ｩ ｵ､ｦＳｾ IIclosest to ｩｾ 11 i.del 8rLJ222...·.:..:t il1E....9_K...ｨｴ｟ＭＱｬＮ＿ＧｾｌｧＮＺｦ｟ｑＩＰＮ｢ｾｪ vie are leael to we ignore ｡ｬｴｨｯｵｾｨ OlE' ,our USH i.?__bond _i2-1:le i.n.e. 211 1t • ｴｨＨｾ most intimate bond to beins, to Protodoxic pos:Lting of the I'JOJ'ld as existent. 1'h'31'efore, a1tr.ough tbe positing of and .. Jding to particular objects ｆｬＮｴ ＼ ｾ to the o1'1(:n1,::.:.tion to the \Jlol'i:J as 3. ｾｯｨＱＧ｜ 8, ',';8 could say that the explication of Irwrld-bel'Lef itself carries w:i..th "(hat it is t.he occurenr:;e of objects \·;tthjn tbe \·./Orld- beleif horizon that deftnes 'Gheir very be..Ｎｾ｛ｑｌ［ as objects in ths world); we can say, oddly enough, that this worldbelief has :i ts 01,0))1 sense of that Althou;:,h it is rad ically Uiina is most fnm·li?r. ｜Ｇｊｾｪ｣ｨ ural ________ 1 ,HId unrev ea led II proxi u • mally and for thG most p;:J.rt lt • Ｇｾ･ must now extend our ｲ･Ｍｩｮｊ･ｳｴｩｾ｡ｴｩｯｮ of tIis universal ,·.!Orlel-·uelief in a ne-\,) direction. Tbe follm j.ng as a focal ,Joint fOf' the \.lnro] ding of Uw phenomer:olo"'ical notion of horizon and for showing its centrality to l!usserl's pl1enomeno'o;.;y. Herein.) I1ns:::ierl sU::tes that: 115. A cOEnition function bearinz on individual objects of experience is never carried out as if these objects ware ｰｲ･ｾｩｶ n ｾｴ first as from a still completely undetermined substrate. 1"01' \1.S. tl1e "JOrld i always a world in whi21 ｣ｯｾｮｩｴ ｯｮ in ihe most diverse ways has already done its work. Thus it is not open to don ht the t the 1'8 1s no expe r iane e in tlle simple and pri,mary sense of an experience of thinf;S, \'lh1';I1, gr8spina a thing for the first time an1 bringing cognition to bear on it, does nol; alrearly tllm O\4J tI mOI'e about the thing than is in ｴｬｾＬｩｳ .. 0erJi.tjon alor,e. B;very act of exporience, whatever i.t may be that is exporjenced, in the proper sense as it comes into vie 1,\' has ｾ 5lQ. insQ., nee G SSaI' i ly, a krlov,11ed ･ｾ and a potent 1a1 Imm'lledge Ｈｾｊ .ＮＺｴＧｩｳｾｄＩ 113.vin:; ｲ･ｦ｣Ｇｾｮ［ to precisely tl:is thing. ｮ｡ｭｩＳＱｹｾ to sOJnethin;:; of it vJbich 113.s not vet come into ｖｩＮｾ ｉ l'hj.s ｰＡＧ･ｫｮｯＧﾷｪｬ･､ﾷｾ ＨＧＡ ＿Ｚｾ Ｂ｜ｌｩＮｾ｟ｬ ｮＩ is" ).ndeterminate as to cOfJte.fJt, or not compL:,t'?ly clp.tepmined, but it is never completely empty, .nd were it not already manifest, the ･ｸｰ･ｲｩ･ｮｾ･ would not at all be the experience of t'·.:l s one pari-icll.lar t'ni.nr::;. ｋｾｌＭｅｕＢ ....ｾｌＺＮｲｳｬＱＮｸ･ｌ ence has its own horiznnm ,-.-.-----.-----'.-.-...--.. "1 ') ;:J. .c. One initial point that needs to be clarified is thut terms such as t!bestm"al of moaning" or lldispen ing 213 vJi tb respect. to the ac'tiv1.ty of consciousof leaning ll ness are rl.ospal'ately mL'leadj.ng. ItJe are immediately inclined to cl.sk ttltlhat is j.t thnt 'receives' this meantng?" or. "',-I'nat. does COD3C,lOU3neSs Igi'\.'c 1 t"is meaning to?tt It is this direction of thought that drove HI s8·1 to the highly ambieuous doctrine of hyle in h1.5 ｉＧｩＮ･ｾＮ He nmst be\:lare of thls direction of realizinf, tts ｰ･､｡ｧｯｾ ｩ｣｡ｬ nature i.n the ｉ､･ｾ Ｎ ｴＱＺｯｵｾｨｴ ｢ｾｲ \:!e can see thClt the distinctiofJ bet1'!ee_ !"'ylo and rnorphe Hhicl P'l1sserl ma.:te in the Jde3:..::'i is already a highly complex theoreticB.l D.ccomplishm':ln'i..• vJe :i'llst, hO\'!ever, examine ffiOY'e closely 1,Ii1!at it i.s thst is :.;rasped thro\1?b ｴｲＳＮｷＧｾ･ｮｲｬＧＮＺｭｴ｡ｬ refl .etton. }'irst 116. of all., it needs to be noted that reflection is not the expo r i Gnt 10. 1 9. C0:UDJ2l i. Sl}IQfnJ;;. of a coO'ni. t i ve c ontac t t·} i th the world. reith0r is it such that it has be_ore its gaze a r[lP8.1'1]·_[l.0',_•.• ._ . ｳＺ｣ＮｾＬｊｃＭ］ＡＱ ｟ｾＮＭＺ __ｉＱＮＬＧｑｬｲｾｌﾷｉ ｻ Ｑｾ ｲ ＱＺ Ｎ ｾ v_,:- <"l c., vdwse accomplishments of l'(j"'anl'n'y "'l'v'nrt _::::-_':":"_... ;;;,::'J.",,__ v __ .,f.:>,.. ｣ ｏ Ｂ ｓ ｲ Ｂ Ｇ ｏ ｬ Ｂ Ｇ ｃ ｾ ｴｬ｣ｯ｛ｬｴＮ｡ｾｴ ｬ 1,1._ ｾ l,.J .. ｬ ｾ ＿ Ｎ ｾ (a contact l,vhich IIforms" the hyle) "gives" or lIim:',oses tl mearJi.ng on an otherv}:L.se chaotic "sense gi len manifold " or as EU:-3serl calls it a 21 1+ • • • still corr,pletely lJ.l.ldetermined substrate" This I: 0 line of thought is to take the activity of consciousness ---_ _ -_ must D.re ....,ＧｃｓＰｄ......ｏｕｾ .... as alrecdv !lth2:ce lt b(cJfore t1lis consciou.s ...... .. ｟Ｍ｟Ｎ ＺＮ Ｍ｟ｾ de tel' min::d:. io[,1 ｣ｾｸﾷ Ｇｈｾ So ｟ＭｾＭＭＭｾＭ The rmi it 'n: o ｾ ＢＮｴｊＺＧｑｲｬｾﾣｮ［ｌｄ｟ＱｳＹ｡ ＧｌｪｊｾＮｩｬ • • is not a ｑｾＮｙＹＱＭＧＡｱ 19Lt£.:3.L ｪｊｬ･ＮＲＱＭ｟ｴｾｲＡｨ and most ce:ctatnly not such an id8filism as sensualistic psychologism proposes, an ideal ism th"l.t vlOuld d er i v e a sellse f:, 1 "lor 1d frorn sen.seless ｳ･ｮｓｬ ｏｕｾ［ data. 2J 5 To spe.::d{ in t!-is me.' l'wr is t.o thorougllly ignore the decisive insight of the intentiofiality of consciousness. It is 8.5 a s the suppos i. t ion of a 8.1.' r Ofl80U.3 consciousnsss need ｡ｾｴ｣ｭｰｴ ｄｩｬｾﾷ｡ｮＭｳｊＮＱ to "Jh lch to accomplish a relationship, an atte:r:pt vJhtcb leads to h1.ghly 8.mbtgnolJ.::i representntiolit:l'j, theories of from \.Ihid) ｬｾｮｯｶｩｬ･､ｾ＼Ｎ＿Ｌ viG \vhE!retn the arc subsequently ftcut idea of a reprr:::seEtation orr lt only its IJrepres0.ntaU.ves't) o(;::u1's only ｴｨｲｯｵ｛ｾｨｴ ･ ｳｩｮｾ since 'vIe "receive" prcGuppo,· of the thing in itself in thp first place. Therew'th 117. transcends Jtal idealism is not: ｾ • • a lS-.nt:Lsn ]c1.G§JJ-sm v/1ich b 1 teves it can keep open, at least as a limiting concept , the possibility of a world of things-in-themselves. 216 lt'e lllUSt come to sec ,hAt transcendent,at reflAction graspc a world in \<lbich consciousness has, so to speak, "already done its 1,,10]:' [{II. ｲ･､ｾ As Fink puts it lIThe phenomenolo'; :Leal ue'i:', ion first eXi:oses a Mubjeet vlhieh ｡｝ｹ･｡､ｾＺ the ｡｣Ｈｾ･ｰｴｳ 217 It o ". It docs not encounter a slbject isolated from the vwrld l,vt10 must nm·! deduce 01' infoJ.' 8 relationship to the world or remain in a solipsistic enclosure. To remain true to th:3 insigl-jt of the intentionality of co JsciousrJ8ss, 1t\J e l1eed. to see t1-lat. (or ｰｨ･ｲｊｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ＺＳｩ＼ｾＳＮＱ ＱＮＸｴｬｲｳ Ｈ ･ｃ［ｅｾＮｉ Ｑｦｬ ｴ reflecttofl docs !lot. 112."v8 111lmanence, "Ihieb i.nclu-:.1es ill its scope the Ｚ ［ｩｶ･ｄｮ ｳｾ［ of ｴｨＺｾ ,9.o;Lt?t.D..oJ 0 11en the true nature -.. of consciousness is thus roalized, inference or deduction of the existence of the world, or any phi losophy v!hich ﾧＲＺｪＮ Ｒ｟ｾ al' e pr ov ed 0. bs ufd .L tie s. The tasl\. of pheG)fl1enology, then, is to exnli 31:.8 or " un f"ld" I,hat caulS be c0.11Ecl the intentional pre- acconpl:Lshments involved in the phe -lome r 0 log ica l-deseI' ipt iva analysi.s of a p3.rticnlar object. 'fe can "eE: then hat: 118. Ex,cpet foX' the fnct that it remains undisclosed and II anonymous l l , the sys ,em of inter!t iona 1 ach lev ements on the basis or which an object comes to actu91 gj,venness is at work in any simple act of knowledge. The analysis of such kn vJledi3e first presents u.s to encounter the ｢･ｷｩ｝Ｌ､･ｲｩｮｾ fulness of those intentional bestmvals 0.: meaninc thclt make up the tlPl'Bsupposition" for the ､ｩｲ･ｾｴ givenness of the being which is known. In other "lOrds, irltenLLonaJ. a,nalys ts. • . is an exhibitiq.; of the II con ditions for the ｰｯｳｾＧ［ｩ｢ ｬｩｴｹ ｬ of the sivonness of aX!, object in experience. 21° Hence, phenomenological-intentional analysis does not, by itself a clear and explicit set of intentional acheivements, but rath?r it has the ;m liCl·t ..L ｾＮ ｟ｾ ;"].-,1' r·h .>( .. J -\.... Ｑ Ｍ ｾ ｊＬｾＮｬＺｲ ',c, Dl"rd as .... (..l It'''lvlD,,r:J'r ｴｾ 1. ｊｴｾ｣ＬＭ n ,-,',' ',',. f' "'!,,(: ()r:l • 17",1,"1.•, e ' ' ,'"" +,,1' , 1 (: - '.1. _ 219 ve'"v ｬ ｊﾷｮＨＺＱ ｅＬ Ｂｾ Ｇｲ ｮ｡ｊＭ Ｎ ＬｴＱ J n'>. _J . vel. .ltJ_ ... ;C0m, n',1.1· ,S}.l('> - ｾ -r _....... 'II Jr ,"',t" t"'fll-l ＮＬｾ ; "having of.' a vlorld tl t.. \:;.. rlepd,c: . . - unfolding and C ,'j' ,'ll-' 1,»)., ｾｬＢ｜ I' 'fl S!C' Ｌ ｾ (:J I' ' v , .]. 1,] " 0 ,I' J. 'd. - 1)e J 'j e f . p. ｾ a (' t h,h,.Cl ;::) ultiamt0 horizon or presupposition of all sense-structures f'olwded upon it ｾ becomes tbe central tliema t:L'2 for phc,wom 1no- logical descriptions. From 'his extension of the task, ve can easily account for the emergence of the pherlomenologico.l notion of ｌｾｑＮ ｐｾＡＮｊＲ Ｌｌｴ and its ｾｌｮ｣ｲ･｡Ｌｳｩ ｮｧ centrality in Russerl's later workse This section of our work, we feel, rather than being a mere rep_titian, has served to rc-focus our attention on the explicit problems at hand. From this realization of VQ_t'o'!...t22DJl and the sutseq Emt realizatiotl of reflective des- I11\lltj.ple senses and uses of the rJotion of "horizon" in the pheno2enology of Edmund Russerl. 119. Through the performance of t e ｰｨ･ｮｯｭＱｾｩ｣｡ reduction, the task of phenomenologi_al description imm2descrnt:i.on of the noem3.tic: 220 . --'''-QQ..ntent or tr e object as meant 3.ncl a ､･ｾＳ｣ｴＧｩｰｯｮ of the 221 tl :Ln tl di<ltel becoc1es a dU.al one: ::l whinh this objectivity appears as intentionally Immanent. Eusser1 tell.s us that these two modes (3 c t e r i zed des c rip t i v e ly a s This inscpa 'abl 1.1 ty mUC'G • ' .can be c a1'-a b 1.Y. II ｢ﾧＡｬＮｑＱｌＬｾ｟ＢｴｯｊＲＺｉ｀ｲ 222 be kept j.n mind due to the fact Ｓ･ｰ｡ｾＧ ｬｴ･ ｙＵ at \.ve n02d to describe them t ll • but \·le sLould not be mj_s1ead by this necesstty. The II ll. C' S ｾＺ＼ｯｬ ｮ･ｭ Ｑｩｰ i.ca J. e r 1 t e 1. 1. sus in hi .s ｩＧｾｄ｜ＱＺ［ｽ ｊｾｬ Ｎ｟Ｑ Ｙ ｄｊｲＮＬ Ｒ ｦ Jot .Lon of her :i.2on is i,nt ｩｾ c eｲｾ､ 223 ｾｊＮＡｧｌＬＱＭｺﾣ , With a "presL1f.iposc,d. sense lt or "implicit meanin:; whicb 22 11 is HvagueJ.y floating before us" • By ｢ｾｊｦｳｩｮ Ｚ Ｎｮ＾ＺＬ \.Iitb this i.mpllcit, unclarlfied sense, \<Ie attet:lpt to f.ill oilt and ri.rlg to light its irnpU.cattc-ns and ｣ｯＭ､Ｙｴ･ｲｬ ｩｮｾｩｴ ｯｮｳＮ As we have seen, because of the intentionality of conscious225 u ,,8S..:> , tbe "intontive senso ,so to ｳｰ･｡ｬｾＬ lt goes oeyol1d tl what. is actually ｾｩｶ｣ＮＡＱ rQndom one. ｾ･ see Yet thts tlgoing beyond" is fJot a. ｴｨ｡ｾ every object is given in an indeter- mj_nate but dotc.rninablr: Hhorizon" "Ibich can b3 unfolde" by ｳｬＧｪｮｳ･ｾｩｮｶ･ｳｴｩｏＧＮＳｬﾷｩｯｮｳ or sensG-ex!,licDtions as HU32e:cl. Ｈｾ｡ｬ ｳ l20 0 them. In fact, this proves to be the very definition of p,lenomenology i tSJlf.': phenomer,ology is a r8.dically \I . . . . 226 cat.i212. conce ived Qrjj;j..ｬｰｾｧＡ｛･ｳ｟Ｍｬ ＿Ｎｄ It tells liS ｴｨ｡ｴｾ ｬｴｰｲＨＧｾ､ｯｬｩｮｌＺ､［･ ｮ The horizons a]'8 \'J e say a 1. so: i.t tl , vie can ｾＭＺ［Ｇｬ＿ｊ｟ｴｾＺＡｊＮﾧ｟ "J e can IJotentialities. ｳＮﾧ ＡｌＮｑ ｴｘＮｊＺｾ ｚ i ?':':o?Il.-illl.? t __ｊｾＮ ｊｌＺＧＮｾ or u.nfold it. • •• -1 227 He goes on to say that: By thL1S explica t implicates l' ｩｮｾ the 1I in ant iva sense II or II intent:i. onal 229 involv.rJ in any parti.. ula.1' Ｌｭｮｴｾｈｬ ｯ｣ 'le ent.e.t' in to the determining horizon of sense within which the ｯ｢ｪ･ｾｴｩｶ Ｂｹ appears, with the ｾｯ｡ｬ of making determinrte those implicates. This explication of the noematic content We may begifi with a particular objoct and move a.nd v;hicl1, by virtur:) of' its appeal'cU1Ce withi I this hcr izon 9 determines the pal"ticuslr sense of the 01 ject. He may usc as 121. an t18 example a paltJD in chess game. The board, the rules of a game, the other men on the board and so on, all co- determine the meanin:; of this piece lllJ;J]2..lJOrizor!...\vjth.tn 1t IN;e :L t8 meaning To use another example ｡ＵｌＮｾ ｰＮ ﾧＺ ｈｰＮ more relevant to our present discussion, we may say that a psychological descrption of self-experience is co- dete "mined in its sen .. e by its j.mplicit reference to the organism and its subsequent determination of ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ 230 subjectivity as something worldly. We see that this :l.mpU.ed whenever we speak of ｾＹＬｫｯｬ ｧｩ｣｡ｬ a b ou t Ｍ｡ｃｬｚｏ ｾＨ ｓｐ (l'] pla ced \.) 5_ t.h in this ｙＺｬｶ ｾ｣･ｊｯｵｳ subjectiVity. ｊｵ､ｾ･ ｮｴｳ \. ,. .i ,. ｾｳｵｭ t' ' "nerooy a 1 ways ｾ De impl i.c it context or IIbor i.zon tl , for '\.-] i. th- out it, ps;{oh010:;1ca1 nbjecti.vity loses :1.ts senseo S:LXJ.ce psyc ho logy pre suppose s . 'J is contezt, it :Ls t he ta.s l\." of pheno- menology to explicate it in order to fjnd the presupposed foundations of psycholo3Y. Each IItruth" about an object, we avoid the false Being or is sue"! .91l1:.Y. of one particolar mode of ｑ｢ｳｯｬｵｾｩｺ｡ｴｩｯｲ ODe particular ｴｬｊ･ｮｾ method of ｩｾｶ･ｳｴｩｧ｡ｇｩｯｮＮ Russerl 12?-" The traler in the market has the relationship in which it not a good one, and the best Is it a ｰｳ･ｵ､ｯＭｴｲｨｾ merely his market-truth. In stands, is his truth that a'trader can use? because the scientist, involvDd in a differ::nt relativity and jud:,ine vlith other aims and ｩ､ＸｾｓＮ looks for other truths -- with "i.;hich a great many more thins;s cn be dOnE!, but not the one thin:; that h::i s to be dono in a l1H..n ket? It is high time that people eot over being dazzled, articularly in phU.ovophy and ｬｯｾｩ｣Ｌ hy the :Ldeal and re£;ulative ideas and rrlGthods of the "exact" sciences -- as Ulouf,h the In-i.tself of such SC) ･ｮ｣ ｾＩ '<Jer(:J a tually an absolute norm for objective bejng and for truth. Act lally, they do not S88 the ,<!Oods for the trees o Bocause of a splenjid cognitive performance, though only "i'Jit.ll a ve'J' restricted teleolo?,ical sensE;, they overlook the infi.nitudes of lifo ani 'ts cognition, the icfinitudes of raiati e and, only in its relativity, rational being, with its relDtiv8 ｴｲｾｴｨＮ 232 Al thouEh '\'le may be accused, in saying this, of insinuat.ion of the future, it is precisely the desire to "', C0l1ll1S10n ' '" l.£llT-,_ 'h O'f .2QEl.E:ps ..2l....... -\1 this ｾｶｯｩ､ lne. ' h SB1'ves imp. ' 1 '101"1 t Y as critique of psycholoeism. Psychologism's inability to real.izQ the nature of logical objectivity is based on its inability to realize the fundamental nnd essentiAL difference between logic and psycbology. The sub-equant is based II confusion of fields" blindness to t e horizon wj.thin OD ｳＧｭ ｩｾｯｬ ｨ｣ｹｳｰ whjch logi -al objectiVities need to be and the ､･ｴ｡ｾｩｴｳ･ｶｮｩ false Ilabsolutization lt (or, at the very lea, t Itover¥·extensi.onlt) of the ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ d int.o a region of Being "i-lith ｭｅＧｴｾｬ Which, by its very n:ltUI'e, it is incapabl.e of dealing. In short, we rrwy :'C3Y ::;enerally th8t respective objects of ｩｮｶ･ｳｴｩｾ｡ｴｩｯｮＮ ｳ･ｩ ｮＺＮ ｾ･ ＧＳ of It is because of tbis ｾ ｨ･ 123. Itpositivityll that the sctences are unable to ｳ･ｲｶｾ as a fOlwdation for philosophy. Husserl expands on this in the following ｰ｡ｳ ｡ｾｂＺ Th e IIp...r)l i ｬ｟ｃ＿ＮｾｑＺＭＧ t ｣ｾＱＭｳＺｊＲｌｧＮ［Ｇﾣｲ __Q_L. t 1'11-8_229 sit, i v i.t.Y.: consists pre.c tsely 'in tl1i.s: The SCiCH:;CC'JS, because they do flot u.nderstund their OviD ｳｮｯｩｴｾｵ､ｯｲｰ as those of a productive intentionality (thl intentionality rema . ninG unthema ti.c for them), are LW8 ble to c la1' ii'y the genuine ein3 sense of either their ｾｲｯｶｩｮ｣･ｳ or the concepts that compl'eherJd thei.r provinces; thus they are unable to say (in a true and ultimate sense) what sense belongs to the exi.stent of which they speak or what sense -horizons that existent presupposes -horizons of which they do not speak, but which are nevertheless co-detprrninant of its sense. 233 From this i t follows that: All virong interpreta tJ ons of be i.n::; come ｾ rom n i VB blindDE-J3s to the horizor:. ·tha t .j oin :i n de te rmi.n ing the sense of being, and to the ｣ｯｲ ･ｳｰｯｲ､ｩｮｾ tasks of unco 'ering implicit intentionality. 231+ The definitivG result of the ｰｨ･ｄｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ is ｲｾ､ｵ｣ｴｩｯｮ the realization of the intentionality of consciousness. It is thus th8t this method, \'Jhich Z ',ves rise to ＺＧ ＱｩＡｌｬｊＬＨｾｩｬ intentional-horizon analyses, is able to accompl.ish a scar.hin Q out of the foul1da.tions of the sc:Lences bv maldng explicit the productive intentjonality in 1 0lved in their resnectjv8 activities. Thus the notion of horizon i a fundamental to phenomenoloeYe VIe mns l: r BLlBmber tha t in p1Jenonw1101of>,:ical de cl1ipti.ons; ｴｨ･ｾｲ I'le ill st l'p.illain true to the p 1'e phenomena as gives themselves to us. Tn pa't,j.cll1.3r, to use yet another example ｾ we must remembr-::r th2t. vJhen speaking of say yi.sJ2B.l must not move to ｡ｮｯｴｨｾｲ tvne of - ...........----"'--------- ｪｮｶ･ｳｴｩｾ｡ｴｩ｣ｮ --" ｾ . 124. (e.g. atoms and light waves, which are theoretical objects and not visually perceived obje.ts as is the Doema of visual perc eption) in order to expla in y'is.lLcU.-Pe ｲｾ pe.rcpetion must be phenomenolo::;icall. eptJ.o.n.. 'Jisual. ｣Ｑ･ｳｾｲｩ｢･､ on its OVID account, "vhlco is to say, v iSI18.1 perceptiofl and its noematic ccntent must be placed within its horizon and th truth relative to this horizon must be sought. To allow physical science ( hieh has _·...1§_F:vll1 truth and it§.....£llil hori.zon, its 0i£1. form of objectiVity, ｩｴ＾ｾＮ ＹｽｩｄＮ mode of evidence) to intervene and posit its findj.ng,.s as ihEt tI'uth of visual p.rception is as misleading and philosophically incorrect as ｡ＱＮ Ｐ｜ＧｊｪＮｮＺｾ visual perception to confirm or disconfirm the atomic theory of light-waves. VJe may also move. I in determinEJtion 236 ll 23) It of sense I·ve are no'] involved 1n tlantj.(;ipations of vJbich pertain directly to the particular In lookiLZ at tris coffee ｱｵＨｾｳｴｩｯｮＮ object in descrij)tions, '"7:--- ｾ from ｩｮＮｩｧｲｮ｡ｬＺＮ ｟ｨｯｲｩｾ this particular object to an ｣ｯﾷｾ､･ｴ ｲｭｩｮ｡ｴｩｯｮＮ ｮＨＩ･ｭ［ＺｬｴｩＨｾ - - - - - . , , - - -... _ - _•• - . _ , ｣ｵｰｾ for example, ac tual:'y s'3e" the bottom of it or tho back of , l1 ... , • I am not Ic<ctue.lly giv0JV or do r;ot "actnally expcrien<:e tt its determinable volume and so on. These aS98cts :'go beyond lt "ihat is "actl1.C:llly g:L 1 en tl into that ",jhich .9..illl actnally be giVEn if I investigate the object further. These aspects are p:eescl'ibod in the intor/ci ve It g i v en" in a SEH1S ｾ tl c off'e e cupIt. Tbey a1' e there by .xl'll i'-:"a t ion of U is i.nteLt i ve sense. VIe ｳ･ｮｓａｾ may also discover of a ｊｗｾＮＬｬＧ aspects of the int0;,.. U,onal ob.iect in 125. question, \.'Jhich \'Jill serve as an lI en1' tchement of meaning" and an extension of the sense of the object tnvestigated. ',.'he esser.tially lnac1equ.3te givenness of a transcendent object, mOfLJents, then) has a II meaning is enter'ca inert focus ll 10'1 j n tha t the a1'1' i 'va 1 of nevi i thin the "ni ty of meaning w1- iel1 is the intentional obje t. From this , we can follow Euszerl when he tells us that: • • • v]ith ･ｶ ｲｹｴｨｩｮｾ actually given ｽＲｑﾣＮｴ＿ ＮＲｮｾ are awakened; thus, if I see the front of a motionaless thing-like object, I am Ｌｳｵｯｩ｣ｳｮｯｾ ｾｮｩｨｴ ｾ the horizon, of ｴｨｾ ｢｡ｾｫ of t"e obje2t, which I do not see. The tondency which aims at ｾｨ･ object then Js dj,rected to','D.:cd making it 8q 1lally accesJiblt:3 from the ｯｴｬＺｾｘＧ side. It is only with this 8Grichement of the ｾｩｶ･ｮＬ \,.fi·ro, the ｴＩＧﾷｾｮ･ｴＱＧＰｴｩｯｮ ir,1:o p:::lri-i, \·,lp.rit"ie<, a 1')(1 thr,) be j: ＺＭｾ s . j, v Ii f r ｾ In a J. 1. _. ｾ ide s ｾ , Ｎｾｩ - t h :; ., ｾ Ｚｾ 8, 0 Ｑｾ ｾ Y- ｰｾ sse s fromthe initial mode of ｾｩｭ ｮｾ at ｳｯｭ･ｴｾｩｮｧ into the mod.e of ｣［ｾｴ｡ｾＮｮｭ･ｮｴＵ a mo<le I.. . h-teb has its own dlffel"3nt degl'ees. th.; g G; i: 238 Saying that I see a coffee cup bc? me is l'(:l . 1. Y: saying ｳｊｲ･｣Ｍｾ that it has a b3Ck side and a bottom. J may, I am able, to fulfill thj s part of the intent-iv8 sense of by investigating the object further. i1 ｣ｯＭｩＮｲｬｴ･ｭｨｾ､ ｾｵｲｴｨｾｲ 11 co ffcc CUpll as yeo not ac tually g5.vcn ll noematic moments of this object at'c thus alone I,jith \rJhat is actually given. T1 e [,articula,r aspect ,-Ihic11 is l'act lally ;,;iven lt (the front of this ::;up) ·\'\}i.thin Hh5.eh it ｯ｣ｾＧｵ ｳ inG8J"ltive sense 11 (Le., \\lj,thin the horizon of the co ffee cup"). 126" The notion of horizon is absolutely decisivB for a clear understanding of the phenomenoloeical proceedure in noematic de criptions. It allows for the possibility of novelty and discovery as well as the possibility of error, since the bewildering fulness of intentional horiinvolved in any p3rti.cular ZODS may ｳ･ｮｳＧＳｾｩｮｶ･ｳｴｩｾ｡ｴｪＮｯｮ easily lead us astray and nay thereby necessitate new and investigations. Since, therefore ｲ｡､ｩ｣ｾｬ more no •• the clarification means shaping the sense anew, not ｯｲｩｾ ｮ｡ｬ merely filling in a deliniation that is already determinate and structurally articulated befo:cehand lt 239 5 the 1'ea11- 2a 5.on of' thf: phenoffi'?Dolof!,i:cal notion of horizon aDO. how i t follows from the of t, e intenti_nality of CCDS- ｲ･｡ｬｪｾ ｴｪｯｮ necessi.tates that ｳ［ｾ･ｬｲｳｵｯｴ｣ reflection be ｴｲ｡ｮｳｑｇｮ､･ｉｾｴ｡ｬ The phenomenological not1.on of horizon is also intimately involved in ＮＲｑ .［ｊｄＮＩＺｴｑｾ ＮＱｲ Ｚ ＭＹ ｮｑｾ ｊ Fusser1 tells Tr c ｲｨ･ｬＩｯｭｮ［ｾＺＮ 'to ｾ cdoe.: not .Ln<luir(-) \<lith merely a naive devotedness to the j.ntentional object plraly as such; he docs not consider the intenti nal object only ｳｴｲ｡ｩｾｨｴｦｯｲｷ｡ｲ､ｬｹ and explicate its meant features its manit parts and properties. If that were all he did ｴｾｇ intentionality, which makes up the intuitive ox' non-intuitj.ve consciousness i tsel f and the ･ｸｰｬｩ｣｡ﾷｾ tive considering, Houlc1 remain ftarJonymouslle .. 2 1-10 Rathel': ','Jhen the pllenOmGf!o1.or:ist exnlores Ｈｾｶ･ＮｴＧｹ ｨｩｮＲ ob:ective and \'lhatevGr ear" he found i.n ｩｴｾ 8.:-,:cJ..uslvcly as a ｴ･ｯｬＧｾ ｾ t :. 0 f C' 0 nJ s i () 1 ("';;,)_1 ,- e " ｾ It 1-. " el') vco j' 0'" C 01- '..t. d".., .,. a "1(1 d t::, .);co .... 1', e J t.:.. • • 'r.> • t j' .,.,--t· l' 1" I ＢＮＺＬｾＩ ,.L.Jr 8.1. ' "' d OC,l." '....,-. " a.){' Ｌ｟c:ＮＩｾ［ＬＮｾＺ ( n' r> h ()1.1 l' ｜ｾＮ'" C.ll D,,. 1 Onl.Y S ...ｬｴＮｾﾷｊＬ｣ＧＨ .. 0 Ｎﾷｾ ,.,... • J. Cl ｾＮ r. 1,..;...... ｾ 1 • • !:"l' I '':> •• , ' Ｎｾ ＮｾＺＬ 0 ｾ lJ j <• •. .; J. Co J.", ':I 127. latcd back to the corresponding Ego and the §HZQ cqgit2 of \>111iob it is the ﾣＮＲｬ ｾｴ Ｌｱｴ ＱｭＮ i18.t11e1', ,v1th his reflective regard, he penetrates the anonymous "coi:;ative" life, he uncovers the def'irtUQ. sjrnthetic courses of the manifold modes of consciousness and, fur thor back, ttL modes of ｾｧｯＭ｣ｯｭｰｯｲｴｭ･ｮｴ i<lh ich make unde ｾｳｴＺｊＮｮ､｡｢ｬ･ the ob,jective affair I s simple meantness for the 2,';00 0 .0 ＲｾＱ This is . 0 ｾｴｲｃｬ･ｮＮ｡｟｣ a say that the ｩｮｴ｣ｾｴｩｯｮ｡ｬ object functions as 242 u'?. fOI' the discovery of noetic multi= plicities implied by its appearance in consciousnass. We Ｎｬ ｑｾｌ (the object as such), but also vIe are ,Q.0g,itatl.llQ, or intentional concerned 'litb ....j:.hD t. ｾｦＱｩｬ Ｍ ｩｶｨ｡ｴＭＮｬ ｴＮｩｾ do not merely ex.plicate . .j t__?I?.T-!SiU:§' (Ue modes and synthetjc processes of the cogito which are correlative to such an l{r-:t'8 tions in ｾｯ in ,he not ion of ho.r izon once 8.:;H in ｦ ｵ ｮ ｣ ｾ directions, correlative ､ｩｳｴｩｮｾｵｩｳｨ｡｢ｊ･ ｾｯ the duality in noematic descriptions indicated above o By beginning Hitll B. parU.cular object, we discover 2 Lr 3 \\Il1at could be c::.tllcjd an ｧＩ［ｊｾ ｮｯｺｩｾ ..ＧＺ｟ｬ｡ Ｎｦ ﾣｾ of possiLle experiences implied by the pr2scnt experieD s. the present ｾｯｲｦ ･ｸｰＲｲｩ･ｮｾｇ ｾ･ move of this coffee cup to the table it rest orl and so forth. Egch experien:e of arJ object in this "wy Il?,o?,s beyond" the present into an i.nde tsrmi nD. ｾＺ｣ｴ Il ac t1l9.1 11 nor 1zo11 of furt.her po ｾＮＺ［ ext,endinp, out beyor:.d the exv::rienv8 of Each experience, tI Q • ｴｨｾｇＬ is found within ｾ ｴｨｩｾ ･ｾｮ ｩＧｬ･ｰａ i ble expel' ｩｇｮＨｾ os, p:z "tic llar thins horizon of an ＱＲＸｾ 2 Ll·4· Ｑ Ｎｹ Ｌｾｪｩｬ further objects This refers not only to ._-_ ...._--------...-.--ｾＮ Ｍ may ･ｾ ｾｨｩ｣ｨ apprehended, but, correlatively (and necessarily, due to t.r18 intenti JDCllity of c nsciousness) to .Dl.:.i.1}c£ ｳ･ｾｮ ｩＺｬ･ｴｘ vJhich lTIe.Y be undergone. 1:!:i.th referE';nee to .Lt....ｾａ｟Ｎｴｬｑ ﾧＮＲＺ｢ｑＮＲ＿ｘ ..'lQnj_!J!!L.l so' <;, ..&£ tha.t 1ll'C to be ClIla.lyzed, ;',y exr:lic311ngtE"e'ii-co'j:-re lat ive horizons, ':Lt br ings As :i.n ten t i. orla 1 ｾ ｳｵ｢ｩＨｾＧＲｴｊＮｖ Ｚ ｮｲｯＧＺｾ･ ［ｓＸ the highly diverse ｡ｮｯ ｹｭｯｵｾ processes into the field cO;l1pr is ing thor,e th:-l t funct ion II const ituti ve J.i in relation LO the objective snese of the ｣ｯｾｩｴ｡ ｵｭ in uestion ｟Ｎｾ that i;::; to say: not oD1,/ the '"J. r; tual but also tha ｉｾＮ＿ｴﾣＡＮｄｪ ＺＮｊＬ slJtJ,jectiv[? proc;8sses, "Jhien, a u<" slJA1, \.,., • .... ｾＧｊﾷｬ !:>."e lll·I':,·ol·iCl"-,-.1i _.li"..I.. l v.J.... C'1..'l'Dl',-:>t Cl Q'1l "1)I1 (:l0 ....'_4....... t.A........ ..,.l. ... l't...1 ... t'nn 'l":'J s(Jnse-prcducing inten'-iorJali.ty of the actual onQs, and ｷｨｩ｣ｨｾ when discovered. have the ･Ｌｩ､Ｘｮｾ chaIacter of processes that explicate the implicit senSG e • 7 2- 1..·, .Jh Although i.t rC!"1ains difficult to discuss this J:ot ion in Ｉ ﾷＮｳＨＧｬｾ Ｍ .ＮｌﾷＢｮ ' .1 ...... oJ ...... "'8 , ·tl'J::>J( "0'-' .J \ • -.J _.. • ... \ ' ｴｾ･ｫ extension of the '['1" .., " . "" implicit ) oJ ._ 01" Ｇｮｏｬ ｾＮﾷｾｃＩｬＭＧ LJ lead;:; to ｾ ･ｸ｡ｭｰｬ｣ｾ " ＱＮｾ (, J".'S 4- of it. as ･ｸｰ･ｲｩ･ｮＧｾｩｮｧ Il on cor.· l J. f e .' ro OJ the tab eli, eventually to the implicit expe1:'iencing of i i-vit. l'o::;pect to rJo()tic dC.3criptiun is aD ". J ｾ 1.11) I to tho ｾ Ilin as a Ｍ ＭﾷＭ Ｍ ﾷＭＲｾﾷｾＭ ＧＭｾＧＭ Ｍ <0 ' yond tbis 0. 6 ｴｨ［ｾ ｵＺ［Ｎ ,. C H G I.J Ｂ｣Ｎｾ e . ., ｾｬ . \;.,'" ]. . 0ｾ ,> ｾA r..:t ｶ ) the .'('oom n }i,qrli.lY ｾｵｮ｣ｯｶ･ｲｩＮｮｧ of tho Jotentialitirs imulicit in the actualities of n G J. r,J ｾＩ ｾ S C• l' 0 II .:> C'D of noetic descriptions beyond the Gxperience of, for ｯｸｰｲ･ｾｳ roHon ｾｯｮｳｾ in this i.-Jay, not only bc- to 9tb.§j.:...J.. lltQg..?" vhicn determine its sense, but \'/e implied in the pre sen t exps r ience. ';']e D1:ly COlle lud e then ,hat ＱＲＹｾ tion (the world in totality, or the -Lebenswelt) - - - - - - - - we have an ultimate horizon of noetic description (the Protodoxa or Lwiversal ivorlcl-bel.ief • with a particllar act 1 al experience, 247 also discover vihet coul" be called an ｩｮｴ･ｉｔＮ｀ｊＺＬ｟ｬ ｑｲＮｩ ｺｾｃｊＱｬ By viE! ｢･ｧｩｮ ｩｾｧ at this coffee cup, we say in noematic descriptions of the int'.;ntive sense involved th'1t I am ll!Siven ll tho back which I do not presently see. Having a back, a bottom, a determinable volume and so on all sonse of this object to the "inten ,ive" ｢･ＱＰｭｾ by calling it ｡ｾ｟｜ＡＮｾｑ ｩｬ 0. coffee ｃｩｬｾＮ We must now realizo that the intentional- .or1zon analysis ind1cnt<.l:3 the dual task of describing not merely f..tvthex. YYJer. -_...... 2ＴＧｧＭｾ and th-..lr constitutin£!. s'J'ntbeses i·,lhtch I am ･ｮｃＰｾＳ to undergo in order to be given such noem tic able moments, not merely as emptily gi.ven iF'.!. ntentect, but as fully intuitlon. These Hpotentialities U or Ilpos s :tbili- 2 1+9 ties" of expEJl'5.eneG, therefore, ai.'e not. empty of content or mere 1 gical possibilities, but are rather II. 0 .i .tention- ally prcdeliniated in respect of content • • • and in addition, 11<.1vin5 tr'lC cl ar8.ctel' of possibilities ｰＮｾＡｊ Ｎﾧｬｩ＿ＰＩＱＹＮ 250 by ｊｾｨ･｟ｾ ｛ｴｑＮＢ Impli.c:it in the that it has a ｢ｯｾｴｭＬ S8.t1Se of a coffee cap, is a backside, a detsrminnble volune etc. Implicit in this sense, also, is a transcendental clue to ｉｊｏ ｾＬ_ｳｬＮﾷ Ｉｊ｟ＧＺ _ , - ,eXl'eI'l'on"es ' c,/ "., ·<.1,.r..t· tdh, , I C ＨｾＮＧ｟ 11 l'ndOl'CfO n .l'n .l·r:'VAC'·'·-\Cf:... • .ｾｏ 1, .... , y . ltl·r·(t , J':J ·l-hl· .:> r IJ , 130. object. I can turn it over and see t e bottom, although I do not presently sec it. I can measure its volume with a pa.rticDlar of accuracy and so on. Each ､･ｾｉＧ･ ｮｯ･ｊＱ ｡ｴｩｾ moment of the object's sense-horizon in this way ｳｾｮｩｯｰ to or indicates a possible or potential experience which be ca lled -,--_ . ＮＬＮ｟Ｍ Ｍ ＭｾＭＮ Ｎ ＮＭ 8. cor Tela.........t _iv(" e.x:r. . "? I' i8DCc- 1-lor tZ011 (nnfolo.cd in ....... ... ...---.---Ｍｾ ｟ｾＭ Ｍ Ｍ｟ＮＭＮ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ · d escTlpCl0D)o. . J' , noe t 1C We can see now thot 11 rhenomenolo2Y, de script ion is not mere ly ｾｬ expU.cit senS8-structure. ｬ｜ｾ･ﾷｴｲｷＮ ＺＧ HI' ead ｩ ｮ ｾ ｮｯ･ｴｩ｣Ｍｮｯｾ ｡ｴｩ｣ off" of an a1 andy is it doducU.on from experierlCC vJtlich demands that ""xperierlce "conform" to ｰｲ･ｾ ascabli.3hed fI!ethods or pr'oCeec.Ui.'es. It is, rC::.tber a sense- explication or unfoldiD? of the ｩｭｰｬｩｾ ｴ horizons of world- consciousnoss. It therewith extends itself into all areas of conscious life. In phenomenological descriptions of pGrception., memory, imaz:Lnatlon and so on, ',-Jith an eye to descripti;e analyses of their noetic (the act of pcrceptior\, tbc ac t of r e mernbering, the ｡ｾｴ of imag ini.ng) and noematic (the perceived as such, the remembered as such, the imagj.ned as S lcb) const.ituents and t e r correlations. p.£jg..ri We are also lead to the task of differentia- ting different levels of ｾｯｮｳｴｩ ｵｴｩｯｮ acts of con;,eiousn8ss (e.g, ｣ｯｮｳ｣ｩｯｵｳｮ･ｾｳＩＮ @. involved in complex ｡｣ｳｾ｢･ｴｩ｣ consciousness, etl:ical Also we are involved in descriptive BDHlyses 131., of the llfoumling tl of certain acts (e.g. ｰｲｅｾ､ｩ｣｡ｴｩｶ･ judgement) on other more pr .moridal acts (e.g. perception). expli.cation; here agaj.n "Ie eH',,; fa,cG ,,}tth a dual task of Ｈ｣･ｲｴ｡ｩｮｴｹｾ Elxpl:l.catins noetic possibility, probability) as well as noematic (certain being, possible bein? - ... ,) J probahle being) correlations. When investigating noet·c syntheses, 'Ale also involved in a di.'cu.ssion of the becoIne nature of time an::t thereby reter,tionc:,l anI), p:cotentJoDal The realization of the intentionality of ｣ｏｄｳｾｩｯｵｳｮ･ｳ Ｎ consciousness and i.ts horizonal nature leads us into all the ｣ｯｮｾｴｩ ｵｴｩｶ･ of conscious life and correlatively, ｭｯ ･ｮｴｾ vIe can see nO'lJ tint phenonH3DologicaJ. descriptions of the noetic-noematic structures of c nsciousness are indaspensibly linked to the notion of horizon. It has lead us to see the significance of our discussion in of the nature of OPE ｃｈａｐｔｅｾ as an infinite task. It is ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹ this notion which serves to differentiate ｰ｢･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹ from an Idealism whose quest for knowledge could be consumｊｬＱ｡ｴ ,Ｇ ･ ｾ ',', t ]'. . n .-,nj (21 a,.]_1 -.･ｴｮＧＨＩｬｾＢ｝ ,0. r.rt t.... J!:;, ,'I","','j,nl' _ r:::hed "S'I.,·r;te',',nl'l a ,f'. A'c).q.. o·,Lu.i-e ｾ .1 ｾ 11 _ V KnovJlec1ge. The realization of the horizonal nature of trutb (for ea,ch ＧＱｴｬｾ ｴｨｦｬ about an object is such only v!ithin some horizon) indicate;:; that the "hC:I.'Ji.ns of tru.th" j,s not tIle mere Emo point of some infinite ｴ｡ｳｾ \\thic!i can never if. practice be attained. Rather: an8H the It.V1.1U._t£l.l.th.....fS...QlQ tel! i. s__9..:Jr a ｬＺｾｦＮｑｊ \l te.-lil":', o.1.1d £'1' om the self 6X8.mtn'),tion t u'ned toward that lite, if! tllt • • • \·lfJ 11ave Ｘｨｾ continl'ou.s y •..Jj.V j,ne....£g...ｾＺＭＧｹ 'II h constant sutrit of sAlf-rssnonsibilit,. ｾ｣ havA truth then, not ｲ｡ｬｳｾ ｹ absoiutized ,-bulrrther in 8FlC 1"Ca'se as "/i thin its 1',orizon3 ._- 1,o11:icb d not remain overlooked or veiled "frc)ffi-sight, but r:r.re syf;temati .ally eXDlicnted .. . 2-51 T' o 1Jul'.2.1L t.11e of ｾｮｈＨＮＱｯｦ ｮｵ horizons t1:lese ･ｶ ｲＭＨｾｸｴ･ｮ､ｩ ＿Ｚ by sy·.::tematic Scientific explication is th Tl to 1\"yJLl1l...:.thg, l ....J.J.tb. arid thereby have t1:l.iLJJ:l1E in its essentially horizon= 0.1 This leeds us straightway to two very important Ｎ･ｾｷ ｡ｮ poj nts rega.rd ing Hus ."1er 1 ian phe nome nology and. i poslti.on ｴｾﾷ［ l'Ggardin:; tbe nature of trutl B.u:3 its relation to man We see tho t ＨｬＩｾ q The truth is not that which has to be Phenomenology Dhows us t at trJth is Cl ｟ＭＮ Ｎ ＮＭＮ Ｎ Ｍ ｾＭ bsa lute. menns be dealt \-Jith in ､･ｴ｡ｩｬｾ These conclusions can by no so let us ffioI'ply roughly outline wlat '5 involved in them. C"). \'J8 To expand or tb9 notion of the attainment of truth, see tbat }{artin ｈａｩ､･ｧｾ･ｲＬ in his major early ｜ｾｯｲ {, in an in tel' est ing man.nsr. s to. ｴ･ｾＺ ｾ 'We' presuprose the truch because' Je' being the tin1 of ･ｩｮｾ i.ihich Dasein possesses, ＼ｬＮｲ｟ｾ 'in the trut, I . ｾ｜ｊ･ do not pre3upLose it as 30m:3t\:il1',!, 'outsjc1e 1 llS and 'abo\Je'u.s, cC-\>Jar:1$ \·!hic:l, ｡ｬｯｲ［Ｚｾ Hit;') oth?l' ［ＱﾷＡＮ ｾＱ ｬＲｓｉ Ｌ we c mport ｯｵｲｳ･ｬｾｯｳＮ It is Dot we 0ho pr 0 suppose 1\.rutb 1 ; but it is ':tLuth' that ｭ｡ｬｾ･ｳ it at all poss- 133. ibis ｯｮｴｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ ｹ for us to be able to be such that vIe Ｂ･ｳｯＩｾｰＮｊｬｳ･ｲｰｉ ｾｮｩｨｴｹｮ｡ at all. Tr-lth is \-!tlat first makes po.ssi.ble ＸＮｮｹｴＮｨｩｮｾ ].1k8 presuPl·osing. 252 Lst us see how this passage from ｈ･ｩ､･ｧｾ･ｲ sheds light on the phenomenology of Husserl. eas an Ego in the natural atti.tude, I am li.ke\'iise 253 ｔｨｩｾ tells u.s arld at all times a tr'anscendento.l Ego" that " 0 0 0 that i J spite of our ignorance of our true nature as ｴｲ｡ｮｳ｣･ｮ､ｂｮｾ｡ｬ in the natural attitlde, thct Bgo ｾｧｯｬｳ ttis there l and is functioning in(<Jf\Dl:i tuting tl-:e '.>JaI'l • III the natural atUtllcJ.8) vie have as our thematic sr.Jhel'e of ＲｾＩＴ possible ::'nTlestif';ation t"tjG ｜＼ｩ｣Ｚｾ ｬ､Ｎ • "Fe to.ke for s:r,ranted and then Dl'oceE';d on the bas1s of this ｄｲ･ｓｬＱﾷｲ ｾｬｯｳｩｴ Ｎｯｮ "d.th , 2 Ｕｾ our theoretical and practical 'ocations. Huss 1'1 would say then that only because of the intentional ｣ｯｮｾ･｡ｬｇ､ Ｚｅｾｯ fU-lcti.onings of tbe transcendental \"bich can be ｴｦ､･ｳｯｩｾ ｰｵｳ･ｲｰｬｉ is thE!rp. ..ｾｬｴｯＡＺｊＮｾ ＮＳ (by igno.rjng thesE'! tal functions and question ll ) by ｾ ｜ＬＧ･ｾ ｴ｡ｫｩｮＬｾ ｴＺｲＧ｡ｮｳ｣ＨＡ ､･ ｾ the \-.lorld to be theJ''3 tI\'/ttrlou't living in the natu:::-al attitude. '1.'l;ts can t,"! exp nd.erl in two c1 i1'8ctions. 1.':e cOlild the t.rut·h 1n thC'\t VIe ｰｲｅｾｓｕｰｽＬｯｳ･ ｣ｯｮｳｾ［ｩｯｵＳｮ･ｳ ＭＨｊｬＭｴｨ･Ｍ｜Ｎ［ｯｲｬ､ (whi2h for Husserl is the seat of looked in favou.1.' of the \vorld D_S ｅｶｩｾ･ｮ｣･ and truth) to such, no',,! naviely ｢･ｬｩｴｾｶ･､ to exist independertly of our consciousness of it. This vie can also ｳ｡ｾＷ thesjs of the ｾ･ｮ Ｎｲ｡ｬ is pl"S isely the fl2,t tral attitude. ｩ｣Ｌｵｳｮ･ｳ ｾ secondly that it is truth (cons of-tbe-·\rJorld.) vlhich makes pres(lpposing possible (i .. e., presupposing that th8re l.s E world). In the end, we can say ｰｲ･ｳｵｰｾＭＩｯｳｩｮ･［ that truth makes VJ8 possible precisely because presu.ppose the ｴｦｬＮｾｩＩ｜Ｂ to the notion of attaining ｲ･ｾ｡ｲ､ \ ith vie may say the fol101tling. attitude, if vJ9 ide ｾｨ･ ｴｲｵｾ Ｌ if, ltJhtle remain.ing in the nat1Jral ?56 attempt tel fini t'')c ＺｩｑＮｬ Ｇ ､Ｍｾ ｲ｟ｃＲ ｕＱ､ th3t. iS 5 proceed Hith a mundane philoso;'.11icB.l enterprise, since it is taton for grantej that the theDatic of possible knowle1;e is the world defini tion. of the ｛ＡＱｵｮ｣ ｴｬｲｾＧ＿ Ｈｷｾｩ｣ｨ 1 0 ｓｬｾ･ｲ p'ecisoly i ty of tbi s proceed ｌｕﾷｴＮＺｾＩ the ｴｾ･ \·;01' 16,- origiJl must be speculatively I"Jos', 'lated. as U:'anseendent Ｇｊ ｨＨｾ t.o tbe vlOrld. t 0 Q£.'::.g !11D 1 iSh a sophy (i.e., tle ｴｨ･ｾＲｴｩ｣ ｾ ｨＸＮｴ t:.'uth 5 then :is taken to be "ontsille" l' e 12 t i () 11 ｴｬｾ･ｲＧ t () it. j.s a Ivorld ClnJ thc::t thp ":iol'ld is sphere of all possible also ex.poses the SOUI',::e ｋｮｯｾｬ･､ｾ･Ｌ ｰＱ･ｮｯｭｇｾｯｬ ｧｹ of the necessity of mundane ph.LJ.")- i.ntIJ.it:i.ve ,3tvcnness) of tbe ｌｲ ＮｈＧｪｳｾｯｮ､･ ｴ "joL'ld·,ol'igin 135. T11 i s expos it ion, . cr:; ompLLshGd thr ol.:u{n th9 phe[Jomeno logical red U2 tioD, us t1la t for p lenomE, no logy 'bO\o13 II In place of a transcendent relation Lctween man and the wor1dground, i'JC must posit a transcer::)(?ntal re}ation • •• 11 For pherlomerJolo.;y, man lL':!.!..J.Y__ ill_t.he._trut:lt (men ｬｩｶ･ｾＬ is, in a ｣ｯｮｳｌＺＮｬＱｓ･Ｓ［Ｍｦｴｨｾ 257 tbat \,'}or1.J) but t.hat tl'l1th remains concealed, for as men, we are constantly turned tmu;l.:c-::1s the war 1t1, anr. not t01t!ar::l s that cons c iousne ｓｾＧ Herein, truth is not ｴｨ･ｾＧＬＺＮＧｯｲｬ､Ｎ ｴｨｾＱｲ Ne i ecu.lc!,ively postlJ.lated. ｴｉＧＮ ｑ ｟ Ｚ Ｎｓ ｲ ｾ ｬ､＼Ｇｪ ＮｌＭＺｴ ｑＮｓ ＺｬＲ Ｌ is tru.th a ｴｉＧ｡ｮｳ｣･､Ｌｾ to relrlti.oJ:lshj p. Rathe,].', trDtrJ is '.llicl1 he ｭｵｳｴｃｊＮｴｾｱＮｪ［ＧＱＮ｡ tr;3nsc(O,;Glcn-cal to man Hnd bm; remaining i:or :hc \'101':: D.:'] ｭ｣ｳｾ 3LJ.ch is flalrGa.dy atta:LnE"d lt concealed and presuppos- ｾＩ｡･ｴ 'vlhicr:. arE: exelilsivcly directed ､･｡ｬｾｌ Ｑｴｩｳ e' t·y m.:1l1 in hts to';lal'ds the S' -of-· d. The ｴｪｾ ｬｴｨ must no J be ｬｾｌＺＧ ＮﾣＬｧ Ｙ｟｝ｑ l'Clther than attained. The meUlOd of tbis reG very is the lli18)191Q.:':..Q.ｱｾｯ .Ｎ｛ｬ｣ﾧＩＧＺ｟ＯＨＱｾｑ (2)0 Pheno:HGfiOlo£;y sbol;.'s us t.Jat trut;h is both l'''Jlative an:\. Ｎ･ｾｬ｜ ＱＩＨｳ｢｡ ',.,10 Ever ｾｲ Il l ｾＬＮｮｬ ｴ ｌＧＮ Ｑｪｊ Ｎ ｦＧ､ＱＮ may expand on this as fo1.1.ovJs. t ｾＱＡＮｌ 'clative truth", that is, 0 t. is n (l C C S S U7 :L l y a truth relative to a parti- cular horizon. This realization absolutj za t.ion of h ｪＬｾ ｰｾ･ｶ ｮｴｳ the ctogmatic ne partieuJ.8.r sphere of t,Y'nth and one pCl.rticnl:1.(i type of inve:.:;t.i:;n.tion. .§Jl....Q.2ject J.s an ll a bsoll1te truth ll , that is, ::. tl'uth vlhi:::h is not itself rela.tive to a horizon for in sp9aking of our con.sctoDsness of an Obj8ct, the hor:LzofJ is 1181'ein already:i.1Lnlier1. Lot u.s u.se Oui' eXD.1nple of R pavln in to illustl'ate this. D. chess ｾ｡ｭｅＡ ODe comes to realize that t11C ｾＢｨ･ｮ torizon of a chess 38me, one caD tlen not say thHt this pm-JI1 is in_r.£':.81j.ty 8. pie·.;e of vfOod c.omposed of val' lOllS atoE1S and th< t it a pQ\Vn is mapel,r rtsub,jectivs lt ｣｡ｬｕＮｄｾ ｾＧｩｪｴｬＺＢｌｅ and in no SGDSe llobjectively trUG lI • -: Ｂｳｬ ｲｾ ｡ｮ the h l'iZOll zon of ｉｴ｣ＱｊＧＳｾｮｩ｣ｴＱ ｡ｾｯｭｳＮ In this wny, every truth about the to its horizon of ｣ｯｬ･ｴｩｲｾ tb' s piec:e is a ｳ･ｮｳＰＭ､･ｴ ｲｾｩｮ｡ｴｩｯｮＮ ｾ｣ of is relative ｯ｢ｪｾ｣ｴ cannot ask, therefore, Il\-Jhat is the objec t in·"itself? :i.ndepen::-lent of any horizon?1t for thj.s essentiall.y asks 1l·.,.!l)c1t is tl e 0 ject Wholly and ｣ｯｭｰｬｾｴ･ｬｹ it?" As Ive ･ｬｾ｡ｨ independent of our consciousness of ｾＱｬ Ｇ｜ｯｨｳ this non sen S 8, for ita s ks for ｣ｾｵ･ｳｴｩｯｮ VI h,;'? is foe !:\J.sse1'l pure t the 0 b j e c t :i S 1;! 11 i 1eat the same time denying it any re'ation to the possible sphere of meaning ( oncciousness). Yet, in line with Eusserl, Ivith such aIjc1 SllCh moves et.c. nence, consciousness of ｡ｾ object ｳｴ｡ＡｾＸｭ･ｮｴｳ :':loout our statements about objects 137. withLn their respective horizon) can claim to absolute trJl tll in th i. s way are a bso lut ＺｩＮｾ＿［･､ va 1 tal. ty. The ..-Qr i ｺｏｬＮｾｦ H ｴＺＩｮ｣･ｾ ｾＮｪ Or" our .::Jl·,acem" 1(,.s cab oue" th e ':;',::>m :...-.. cq J 01" -1. t eollr SGa 1 ｃｬｓｾ ｃｪｾＮＺ＾Ｌ • ments about the proceedure of chemical analysis, are noorelative, for we may in truth and beyond doubt what ｾ｡ｳ ｲｵｬ･ｳｾ the rules of chsss are (the as part of the hori.zon, which determine the sense of a pawn) and what the proceedure of chemical analysis is. This horizon, so to speak, becomes j_D tbis vlay a "norm ll for judcin.c; tl1e senS9 of an object considered under those norms. Here we must note in \vhich blocks us from 1'ul1 1 U11S part of ｈｵｾｳ･ｲｌＬ a major difficulty ｰａｳ ｩｮｾ ｡｣Ｎｾ･ｰｴｩｮｧ ｵｮ､ＧＳｉ ｳｴ｡ｄ､ｩｮｾ ancl \'le tend quite niciturally to say tllcd: \vhat is "thoi'8!! :Ls one object and Colling it a pa\'m or a piece of "!Ood are merel y tlvo 1:Jays of speaklng Q.!2Q!:lt....ｾＮＱｬｴ ＮＢｧｬｊｪ ｴ｟ｾｬ ｩＮﾧ Th ts? of 1.s COllI' S8, D. r? sur. gallc e of the natural attitude and a resurgance of the distinction between objects as meant and objects are meant. How- ｷｾｩ ｨ ever, if we pursue this path, we will eventually ask ｉｬｾ｜ｊｨ｡ｴ is the object itse1.f, tliat thtDg tvlO clif'I'(H'ent \'W.YS?11 ts seen in ｜Ｇｉｨｩ｣ｾｨ lve can thu.s be lead to a form of' scepticism by sayinz that we can never reaah the ｴｨｬＮｮｾ itself, for we always see it from some Viewpoint. We can bl3 l(:lsd furtller to S£lY the.t ｴ｢Ｈｾ object j'" not a ［ｲｊＧＺＮｾｬｊ pen-In, nor is i.t ££.311);1: a composition of atoms (fol' i;)e still prosu.I)pose thE3.t lIto be reallylt means to be such anj sud) a Hay 1nd(3 perldent of aLL ｾｳｮｯ｣ iousne s s). ｜ｾ e ai' Ｈｾ only leael 138 . this way if we continue to presuppose the general thesis of the natural. attitude v;]"ich tells us thDt the object is there as i t ' s independently of all consciousness. By suspending this belief, we do not forfiet the possibilj.ty of attainine absolute truth. It seems as if this must be forfeited for va seem to not be able to contact the thing in itself. Once this belief is suspended, we no Ｎｴｾ｛ｊ ＮＱ ｊ｟･ ..Ｎｾ ｩｴｌ Ｑ ｬｯｮｾ･ｲ 'vve look, as HU3serl. has shO\vn us, to carries in itself the possibility To conclude, we may ｹｾｳ that since ｈｵｳ ･ｾｬ characterizes man essentially as a Being-toward-truth. - J p1" enom,? E"Jolo::;ical CJ.cU.v i ty t8ke s on the cha1'o.,; ter of an At)l}" ｓＮｾ(',,'1" "C] f·· ;?_'_'".. __ ·) ＮＭＺｾ｟ Y>""c'nOJ,\r<i ,t.:2.:;;-__ＮＺ ［Ｎ'I'll' Ｚ Ｎｾ｟ ,l-,r , f.o_1"' in - Ｎﾷｮ｟ｌｬｲＬＭｃＺＮ｟Ｇ ｬＬ ﾷＮｾＺ｟Ｇ __.. ｾ｟ ·"h.e 'v 'noi"·;z.,()n.C: ... ｾ of truth, we are manifesting our true nature. For Russerl, as ,de h,we saL1 c,oove, philosopY:y becomes rJot '·n ｭ･ｲｾＺ＾ｬｹ intellectual vocation but an ethical 1emand for selfd tscovery. Wo seem to be loft, now, with a vj.ew of pheno- menoloEical which ､･ｳｾｲｩｰｴｩｯｮｳ ｾｯ･ｳＮ ntng \vith a particLtl::ll' inter:t;j.on' 1 ｯ｢ｪ･Ｚｾｴ ental clue l' '} \-Je as follows: by beginas a Iltra.nscencl-· soarch out the pre·-8.c·,;ompU shod and impl icit '3° /. ｾ noetie-noemat:i.c multiplicities involved in th<=; consti tu- \vo.l:.1d \> ith lfsedimented layers of sense" with need expl:L- cation. This view of the passive pregivennass of the worlj (and the view of already a complished ｮｯｾｴｩ｣ phases) needs to be pushed another step, which will lea. us to the llS that tlis step involves a: '" c ｨｩ､ｾ｀ｎ｢･｣｡ｵｳ c ｾＺＮｅＳｊｲ ｑＮｏＧｾ s j,g n ho ､ｬＮ｟ｾ ;11ＡｦｩＮ＿ｊＱＭｾＢ｟ｬＮｵＺ c t i v Lt y Ｍｾ jt is cot capable of beiD? exhibited as present •• cin ｲｾｦｬ･Ｒｴｩｯｮ in its intentional activity bpt can only be "ndlcAteo. by ｴｨｾ sedj.l1H-:JDu. tations left by this activity in the ｰｲ･ｾｩｶ･ｮ ｾｯｲｬ､Ｎ T IUS, the regressive inquiry bearing on the most orieinal self-eviience i3 also a subj2ctive one, but i -c <:;:J.1' son a s t!..!21LC t ｌｙＮｩｊＺＡｲｾＭｬ G l' S ｴｾｊ 0:.1 i r]__$;.....U.!.9 r CL...£1i j ..:tq,a J;. ＬｧＧﾧｬｦＮｾ _ｴｾＺ ＲＺｬｌｾｧＮＭＧ ｴＧ｟ＮｑＹＭｾＳ ｜ＮＺＲＭｪｾ ＬｾＡ c Ｚｾ 0].0 0 y. J tis nece to disn!ante1. ･ｖＢＺ ｪＧｉｴＡＢＺｩｮｾＺ ＧＺｊ Ｑｌｾ I ｡ＮｬｾＧｏＺﾷ［ｊｔ -prein the ｳ･､ｩｭ･ｮｴ｡ ｪＮｯｮｾ of ｾ･ｮＳ in the ｾ ｲｩ､ of our present 0xoerience, to inteftrogate tlese sedimentations relative to th2 subjective sources out of which they have developed. 258 ｯｾｩｳｴ ｳｾＺｬｲｹ By means of this additional step, we finally m07e from sense. V!c no'!] see also the d;;.nge1.' of psychology in the realization of au' true l1::"ture. As Firlk: notes: " • • • the intrarnundcwe life is in fact non8 other than . ｐｳｹ｣ｾＧｬｩ｣｡ｬ the transcendental ｷｯｲｬ､Ｍｰｲ･｣ ･､ｩｮｾ life, but is ｳｾ｣ｨ in being £.90[1('9-1180. fl'c:m it.3elf in a forP1 of constitl1tedness.!l 259 So now we rGa].ize that the passive pre-givenness of the §...Q.UL£.Q.: tlJo absolute U.f'e of the tx'anscendental Er:;o. We have been lead hi our analytic description of the field of phe!Jo:nenological Innwnence to an .meover tng of the multiple moments j_n\olved jn It is nON our '" J'_11 a CO[ir";8.:cn l! <J:!l\,llc,v,Lv c ·'"1' "·1.., c ｾ .' r> II Ｚ＿ｊｬＡＱｩＢｌＹｴｾｹＧＮ Sl]ch ､ ･ ｳ ｾ ｲ Ｚ ｩ Ｎ ＿ ｴ ｩ to sp0.3.k of thi.s fj.c cl It'ar: ｾ c, ... yo It J..tl'i;".; ns. f Immc1nence , Thi.s \'Jill expo:::;e a certain Ilfalsity" i.n our previous exposition of the noetic-noematic structures of pure consciousness, givenness Q as we did with passive pre- ｢･ｾｩｮｾｩｮｾ :3e tbo.t as it may, let speaks of :he transcendental ｅｾｯＮ 11S nOvl see bO\<I Husserl 1 t1. Leyn _.Itc t.tc Des c rip .' i 0 n.3 f _ t. 1"1 e .Jt i c ｬＮＨｌｑｊｾｪ no mc)}0 Ｚｴｾｊ c_3.1 ｾ｣ｬ ･ｰﾧＮｭ ｉ We have now reached a level of investigation which requires a by no means comprehensive discussion of ｾｵＮ｢ｊﾷ･｣ｬ ::> _ transcel.Jd enta 1 , • ﾷｖｾＮｬＭｶ (,.J.. .L l, J , a subjectivity in no way but an abs01ute is not a part of ｾｨＸ so too the \,,lorld :Ls not a real ([..C';.§lJJ p;::rt of the The \vorlc1 maintains its the ､･ｶ ｬｾ ｳ 1fl 8 ＡｾｧｯＮ co, :.vj.t 11:ln the horizon of the transcendental Ego and jts ｾｯｴｩｏｄ f in 1 Ii LJ sse r 1. ｴｲｄＮ Ａｳｾ･ｲ､［Ｚｬ world, ｾ 1'2- i sag r (; e in,;; -v; i t h .' a tor pas l' ega r :l s the notion or the pure or transcen.Jental .E:,o. Natol'p, a 1':eoKa It ian, he ld to the ex-i!) ｾ･ｮ｣ e of a pupe Ego, bu t he also held, in a::cord i'Jith Kant., th<lt this s;ro is not. and car,r:ot It canna. ｾ･ itself a content, ani ｲｾｳ･ｰ｢ｬ･ｳ ｮｯｴｨｩｮｾ that could be a content of cOlsci.ousness. For this reason, it can 08 no des2ribe , since all ｲｾｨｴ ｵｦ des ｾ rip t i l 9 t e l' ｾＮｳ \;1 e ｾ､ gh i-, S e s k toe ill p loy, c 0 IIId be drc:n'Jj) only f:,om the contBDt of GODSe iousn(: ss o • ｾＮ 'I the r\-l i s e lJ u t: e ct c h ,td e11 ｊＧＬｾ e C 0 u ｾＺＱ lila k e 0 f' the ego ':JOllid tUl'rJ it int.o an ｯ｢ｪﾣＬ｣ﾷｾＮ 0 •• 262 Ye l\a tOl' p goe S orJ to say that liThe fact ba t th ing s are in consciousness • • • is the basic fact of psychology •• but it can n 1-}"l' C' u _ ,;:J, ｩＢｴｬｊｾｲ 1'1[1'" C:01' 1 co .nt .,:;. .......) Y''' . .,:)""'" 1 263 ｩｲＧｈｾ､ be de. nor deduced •• •• 11 To •t of psycholOtst Em! can '\,J8 as.:;er,t 3l1.ch a I basic ｦｯＮｾｴ if' ,1-'2 are m.':l.bll? to third.;: it, an:} h0\'! ｃｾｬｮ \;le Plir,k it if not by making the ･ｾｯ and consciousDass. both m-> Ｎｾ L'"ｾ Ｎｾ l ' 0 r 0 'J ｾＬ a::" r-> l' t 1.' 011 I' 1'"', .,.l, 0 let) ,I.: '" ｾ c:: 11 Ｎｾ ｾｉＧ ) J.. 0. ｾＮ C \.. ｾ e C, t s', \ C::' • J _ ,j " ' . ' ", • ,- . :;;, . ' ) •• 26)+ And fu1'thr:l'mOr0, he ste:. tas that I';D.tol'p: • • • In fact telJ,s us that it lcan be acknowledged a.nd s pe -:; iLd.l:; 8::11-',ha s i 2(05 I . 8:11" ely ;(rn t i s ｾ ｣ ｫｲＮｯｩＧｾ ｾ lech;2d 0 ｲｾＺＱＩｨ｡ｳｩｺ･､ ',Ii 1.1 be f\ t::on;l,(lflt? 3.H'ely it \'lill be: IW.cie into arl object? 265 And finally, Hussert states I must frarldy ｣ｯｮｦ･ｳ ｾ <'i J·,-l 't 1'j'j <, -:"'0 .1. ... :J , J' ｾ ｾ m'n r e ..1"et t '.l' C1.1::; ...!. ;. p tC) O .Lf.> J __ \. . 1,. I •• _ .... 1 ...... 1 .... ｴｨ｡ｾＺ •• t,ba i , I am quitel:D2ble +1' VR n--:-c"ssqrV ＢＧ･ｬ ＬＴＢｉ ｾ t..: ....... , .... '-._ . .) J l/_. lJ l' l' '" T a ｲｾ 1 + 1.l\. '"... ,..,1.0 t \:.. ..r , L o.i.'8 i:he ｾｭｦｩ ｬＧＺｌｾＨＩｬ ＼＿ｾ ｯ :lnd +1')1' c' ｩＧｉｔＺｾｬＭＱＧ..._. 0 l' I 1. ./ r J. '.-, I V I .... • .. ..1. u : .:'j ...... n '.., ...... _ ｾ ..J r, t. U. ｾ .l ｾ CI • () and there.fol'e ｰ･ｲ｣ｾｊｩｶｇＬＡ its empirical relations to its own expariences. Althollfht EussC'rl ad:ls ifJ Ol the ｫ＼ＲＺｾｴＲｌ ｉｮｾ ｉｊＬｚｩｌｴ 'finally managed to find' a',;(: ompl is lied. 8. 266 footnote to th9 revised edition .＿ｬ ｾｌ 207 to t .. e ef l(L t tl:3 t he has ｴｾｩｳ ･ｾｯＬ he does not in In the Ideas, ?LssGrl seems t.o ha'JG come to agree with 2rtnin aspects of Katorp's notion of the Ego seems t.hat be 118.8 tlmanagcd to fj_nd it", bu,t it rsmains bl e: . 'I una S ｳ｡ｬｾ｡ ' Ii • 1-.'..... .t,[11S ｾｧｯＬ ｾ 0 thＲ Ｖ Ｘ Ｂ Ｍ ｾ rJ l'ＬＧｾ c: Il'l' reduction can rset any srlp on it". .jl'10 1 >,r.) .J.J 8,rl("J rIo 1'·10reover, he teJ,ls us tbat: ｾ • ｯｮｾｃＱＮＧＭｉＺｌｴｬｳ｡､ｩ ｴｨｌｾｳ･ ;JeculiJl' cOf:1plic:ati,ons j-h() ",'·T'!-·(.)r)' ,.1 :-"1"-0 ,,;,'ao ｾＧｬ ...... --F''1 sti.ll nothins t:J:: t r.:i :,ht b'J taken LQ...l'-.J_:L?01f an:l made i,nta an ｯｬｾｪ･［ ｴ of ｩｲｊＬ［ ｾｩＮｲｹ OJ' j ts ｑＢｾｊ Ｎ B. 0 count. Apart: from its !l\,:ays of ｢Ｒｩｮｾ ｲＨ［ｬ ｴ･｣Ｑｴ ｾ 0.1' '\Jays of bella'lirJ::;lI it is ｣ｯｾｰｬ･ｴ y empty of essential ｣ｯｾｰｯｮａ ｾｳＬ it :-JC:iS no ｣ ｯ ｲ Ｌ ｾ Ｎ ･ ｮ ｴ t.hat could b8 u[;J.'3,'i.'ell'?c:. it is irJ and for ltSE;lf irdescriba'Jle: put'e 'Sso ｡ｮＬｾ｟ {loVJiLg furchc.r e "IJ'th all y - - li 1'+c,1I ·oJ.::> ",x",,<,'('';nl-r>c<: 'ｾｬＭＧ Ｇ .J..--,_1·.4", •.,), 'J ...... . ｪ｟ｾ｜ＮｊＧ • .J..1i:J ;:, .I 269 Havo we not shown get a gr t p however, that tho phenomenological ｡｢ｯｾ Ｌ Ego It, i f i t t h v l' e by r c ma ins indes r; r i ba b ｾ e 0 nth 8 does this not entail that it be left out of ｾｨｯｬ ｹ ｾｯｮｳｩ､･ｲ｡Ｍ tion on its O\'ID ac":olwt? Or d025 thts simply meanc1 that 1'·1-Iv ! .:> r" .l ｾ.1.. mr 0 Ｌｾ .J..) .J gleal resid -''; ;':)..1. Ｑ Ｎｾ Ｑｬ i' 1 e. ) __ -1- 0 .;..... It l' e ,1 '1 (' e 11 ' ,J. ....... ...., that is, does this unafi'8cted by l'r:'duction ? B)th of these lines of t1Joll[;ht seem (wic1encG in tr'lis 1'8 ｴ ｨ Ｈ ｾ ｲ opaque In th(1 Ie}:&'?. vIa are to lel tho. t the ego r ema j.ns 270 indeseribab c on its OVIf! ac·-·oult. vie arE) told in Ego is such that ｉｾ ••• it is not copable of bej.ng exhi.bited as present. • • but can only be indicated by the left by ｳ･､ｩｾｯｮｴｾ ｪＮｵｮｳ 271 its acti1ity. Q' l' C a n '.;, '1 tl u l' __ .I. ... This latter possibility of ·t-j, , '"' Ego seems to parallel ｾＢ ｾｨｊｴ Ｂｩｮｾﾷ Husserl says rogo.rds to related.". Our dif.fiC'\'I.lty now is understand j.ng bm) this car possibl.y bs acrepted and unjerstood in light of the ｾｉｵｳ ･ｲｬ te 11s u.s that liThe \'1hole of p'honomeno lOf-:Y is notb in'" other tells us that the task of is to explore prtori :ntent.ional constH.ution of objects, and the that Ａｨ･ｮＧｾｄｮｯｬ ｧｹ It . . . . this a. priorL • • is nothtng otber than the disclosed" • oJ2y He calls this the " • • • ｴｲ｡ｾｳ｣･ｮｾ･ｮｴ｡ｬ ＲＧＷｾ II ｳ･ｬｦＭ･ｸ｡ｾｩｮ｡ｴｾｯｮ ＮｾＭｾＭＭＭＭＭＭＬＭＭ｟Ｎ｟ＭＭｾｾＭ｟Ｎ of phenomenology overcomes the naivety and exposes the ab- ｷｾｩ｣ｨ o surd ity 0: the tr2ditional epistemologi a1 He also tells ｕｾＩ in tbe ｲＺｧ ｩｳｾＬＮｌ ﾣｾｬ Ｎｌｾ ＲＮ 275 ｰｲｯ｢ｬ･ｾ｡ｴｩ｣Ｎ that HOur idealism is nothing other than a consistently carried through . 276 ｳ･ｾＮｊＭ｣ＱｪＮ ｳ｣ｬＮＺ ｯｳＮｬＩｲ･ｴｬ and also tbat "0ne must first lose the \<I01'1d th1'ou;:; 81)Oc11e so ｡ｾ to regain it in 277 self--examine.tion. tt F':inally, in the Ｈ＾Ｓ［Ｎｲｴ･ｾ ＱＮｄ J Russerl says that set mys .11' the ill Y 1" [I• • II • • • ｾ ?'1edi ＬＢｾｮｑＮｬｴＭＹ 1, the meditatins phenomenologist, ｡ｬ ］･ｭ｢ｲ｡｣ｩｮｾ f'"l.<. 11__ (:• 0 Dr'_ r A ·t e Hr, p_ ｧｮＮｬ ｾｕＧｬｲｳ｡Ｎｬ 2'lb task of ｾＮﾣｩｮｾ ＡＮｬｙｳ･ｬｦ - __ !", c.• " We seem to be left With a paradoxical situation. Self-examination demands that ｾｴ･ for itself, but ｰｨ･ｮｯｾ･ｮｯｬ ｧｹ is nothing other than self- C"/:arlirw.tion • . 28sd-ve this seeming parFl.cJ.ox. bebvsen the 0 Ego become an object possibility and impossibility of genuinc self-examination, we noed to note the followinG. is concerned with a Scientific ｐｨ･ｾｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｧｹ sensc=Gxplica U.on of vlor ld- he U.ef of' intentional nebei.veme universal +-'['18, v II ＬｾﾷｬＮＱ y' volves ltS. j nits beYI i L3 el' ini; fnine 3::; To "put into quest1.on n this of tho world is to demand that ｰｲ･Ｍｾｩｶ･ｮ ･ｳ b J" ｾ _ c tit ..) 1 ｏｾＱ _ .[-jr l --,. e Ｓ｟ｾ '0' e (. elf ｾＩＮ ., '1'1' \'e _1 A ,0. " ") C' CI ｾＬ n-<:>'" fOI' this in- circnlal'ity of flctemptjng to liuestion the \llorlds ｴｨｅｾ pregivenness on the basis of and with reference to a qU8stionin1 subject (man) whic. as I:ar..ＧＨｯ｟ｾ ､ｬｲｯｾ ｬＡｴ is himself apparcieved (an,-:1 ttlerefore part of that ｜Ｇｬｨｩｾ VIe Bre puttins into question by ,he reduction). As Fink notes: It. c .every explication of the a pirori ｾｩｶ･ｮ ･ｾｳ of the world rem3ins upon tho basis of the natural attitude as long as man remains defined as that subjectivity with 146. reference to which this problem i.s to be answered." 279 This thereby further radicalj.zes our view of the pheno- menological reduction. Fink tells us that: The epoche is not a mundane inhjbiting of the ontic and intrarnundane belief in the belns of the ｷｯｲ｝ｾＮ As the Dersistent (nd rar3ic 1. deactiv .tion of the beli.sf in the worJ.d, the cpoche is the disconnsLting of the bellof In tile hum:n performer of beliefs, that is. th8 bra.cket1n't, of tnt> ＧＺｉｯｲｬ､ｾ｢･ｩｦｬｳ self' 1nt0rpretcltion by \;Ihich it 9.p1-10rceives itself' RS being in the vJorJ.d. ｬｾｯｶＡ •• ｾｴｨＰ true subject of bel·.f:f ca') be uncovered for the first time: the transcen1ental ego, for whom ｾｨｴ world (the intramundane subject and the totality of its objsnts) is a universe of J • accectances. ｴｲ｡ｮｳ｣･ｮＱ･ｮｴｾｬ ｾ 280 The uncovering of tte Grue subject of belief, the trans｣･ｮ d［ ･ ｮ ｾ ｝ J V.A ｾｯ , 1 r 1 '.eJ' . J J. vu. ｾ_ ｊｲｏ｜ｬﾷ ｏＧＮｐＬｾ ｣ｾ ' -, clue','fol' the unraveling of our these beliefs ｾＧ［ｩｄ｣･ pa"t'adox. ..., Ｇｑ ｬｾ ...... \j ｾﾷＭｯ .).j6 - ,j'ero U o lｾ to ･ｸｰｬｩｾ｡ｴＸ ｡ｲＨｾ all t",'3 It min',11 «(: ＬｾＮｬ ｾｳｮ｡ｲｴ universal Horld·-belief is do nothing other than uncover myself o Within this hor- izon of \' e find the \'JOrld as intentionally ｳ｣ｬＺｦｾＮ･ｸ｡ｭＺｩＮ ｮ｡ｴｪＬｯｮ Immanent (,:ind, ｰｴｲ｡､ｯｸｩｾ｡ｬ ｹ＿ as int.E3ntiofJo.lly t.ranscendent.). In phenomenological descrirtions of objects, therefore, tbj'J} !llYse1f, for 7'ach ｬｏ･ｭ｡ｾｩ｣ analysis demands a cOl'rsla- tive noetic analysis wt'ich traces the ｡ｰ ｾ｡ｲ ｮ｣･ of an object back into its :;ivenness llinl! transcendental snbjectivit.y,-, The field of ｾｩｶ･ｮ ･ｳ ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｲｊｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ Immanence i.:: the sl here of tc consciousns0s. Transcendental subjectiVity is nothing otbf.':l' t1J<.lrJ th8 total sphere of gi\>sr.ness. He may 'J l7 f h. & descriptions are eo tDS.Q self-examination on the part of transcendental subjectivity. This resolves our difficulty, for \ve see that \.Je may ･ Ｑ ｾ｛ｬｃ "both 81:::183 of the arguomer:t". \>litll It is obviou3 that tho Ego is not a particular content of distinct from the givenness of objects. It is not one Before we conclude this section, we are forced to make explicit a basic ambiguity that has run through thi.s GDtire Chapter. We have inconsistently used two different II <) C'f I' "1/ . \·je1.1 as c> ｜ｾ［ r"\ 1'"'" ｱｾＨ ... l ... ｾ ,_ LJ I' 1'1 (' ,.". n S C l' 0 Ue: hJ c, ｣ｾ S II J '- • • • _ • .......... \..... the p'nr8se "e;iv8nness to conse i.olJ.sness". ambiguity ｨ｡ｾ _ ... aｾ ..., This a peculiar effect when one comes to speak of transcendental subjectivj.ty. Is transcendental subjectiVity tha ｳｯｲｨ･ｴｨｩｮｾ haps imply that this ?;go is subjectiVity !loutsj.de H of that sphere of giv80ness)? Or is transcendental subjectiVity tha.t subjectiVity ｩｲＡＮ Ｍ ｬ ｨｾＮ｣Ｚ Ｐ the pure nhc;nomena a.re:siven (whi.ch could i.rEply that this 2;iO is. the sphere of' It seerns th2t tte ｰｬＱ Ｎｾ｡ｓ･ ttgivenness ifl ｾＺｌｶ･｣ｮ ｳ Ｉ＿ conscious- ness tt 1.8 preferable., HmvE'vGl', it is preferC'ble only 1.£' \,}8 keep in mind that, because of ｾｨ･ revealing of the inten- ｣ｯｮｳ｟ｩＮｯｵｳｮ･ ｾＮＺ［ ti.onalityof consciousness, to be given "inti is not necessarily to be given as consciousness. This total sphere of t;ivenness represents both noetic ((1iven D in consciousness and ｾｩｶ･ｄ as conciousness) and noematic ｾｩＷ･ｮ (given in consciousness and as other ttan conscious- ness) moments as its contituonts. Thus we have 38'd that tranSC(:3r:!'J.C?ntal S .1bj(-?r;tiv.tty 5.s the Sph::::C8 o. glver:ness. there fore dis t in:ui sh ｭｵｳＺｾ It • a' k'cJO 6;,;.}O C l' Lt Ｍｾ･ｲ . 1 '-1' U caJ r.ole lt (. 1:JJ. t ｾ 0: _. . !-:llS sa r 1 be t,1;Jee n P1e 281 n,-d 0_1 -I-1.-. v[1 ｾｨ･ ｅｾｯ e II lit & '" " ｴｾｩｲｴＺｬｮ as identical the ego ｾｩｶ･ｮＬ lJO\<I as /')00 202 II pole is the ego to which phenomena are ＰＳｾ Ｌｾ｟ＢＧＮＺ tLcludes thr-:! subject-pole as well as including the ｩ､･ｮｴｩ｣ｾｬ world as correlate ｮｯ･ｭ｡ｾｩ｣ 01 tl identical ｾｴ (Le., as identical object-pole). ｾ･ si.tioli of cal need to conclude this chapter (and our ｾＺｵｳ ｰｲ cOfnb:i..na tiOD pl-jenOI:18 co logy. ･ｸｾｯＭ .' s phenomerlolozy; by fJotin:-; the pa 'adoxi.- of QPf'l1.D!i§.§. and c1 ｾＹ｟ in Fusserl ian 1!.j·9. 1'ro.ns::enr:lence some ItcorrGlative" to the fjeld of .Old .experience is not an openｩｮｾ w1-I Lch e vlOrl' exi",tirv prior to all expGri ｾｮＲｅＮｬＬ ｴｨｲｏｬ Ｎｦｾｨ 283 s 11 i n Ｈｾ s hi t c ., 00 rn CJ. (; f con;: c t 0 i 1S n c s s. • text, he goes on to say 1:11 Ｚ｢｟ｾｳＮｯ §... ｶｴｾＮﾣ ｰｾＭｓＺｃｲ ｾＡ c It In t his 0 at: e -,,·!..t'.:..QS1L..:t.:.:L 1 tt'€,_Qt ＲＺｬｾＮ ｑ｟ ＹｴＺ ｲｬＧ -\ s i!"r'oi=-,'lj-, or ＡＧｴｯＺＩｬｾ Le::_. 1-\".,O·:·:--c.i.r. "on'-:0.. -:r'l1:.."nnss _ _._ _......:::"":....._ :-.::-:.._.... -....-..:-....:...-_ﾷｾｲｬｩ ｵﾷ _::::_._.. __ t.t j'C .;.:1 ｪﾷｾ｛｡ ｾ ../C ｴＺｩ｟ＧｾｬＡ ｃｏｾＱＳ ui>c1 n 8. ＮＬｙＺｾｬｲ･ｊＭＮ［ｲ･ｾＩｩ ｲｴ Ｎｴｬ Ｚｾ pO:C.31 Ｍｾｬｌ had .;llq 3SDS8 ot.ler t::cUI t)}').t of an in te ｲｾ ｬｾ j.onal un :t:-' ';13 k..i.i1?:, its app0e.rn.n r ' e in ｾｨ･ $1.1 j e c t 1. il i ｉｾ Y i t :3 '2 1.7. o.c c e·.l"i s c 1<) U .:; n G S S • ;;::...-.. ＬＭＺＮ［Ｇｾ 1 .1_' ｾＧＺＭ ＮＡＺ ｾＢＧＺ ｾ Ｎ｟ ｾＮＭ ＺＮＭ ＮＺ［ ｟ｾ Ｎ Ｔ Ｎ ｬＺ｟Ｎ ｩ ｜Ｎ｟ｾ I ·•. r - o- 28 1+ 'rd ".,1, 118 ,,1·'0 Ｇｊ ｾＭ "':'l..1..:::J ::;::,,'S ·1· Vt",J· ＭＬＢｾ｟ｖ . . L.c:• reit )(-·r <. itlorld no!' Dr.Y ath'·r Ｘｸｩｾ［ｻＺ ･ｲ､ of.' any cn-:.;oi.vablt"! sort. CO:-I)'",;S ｉｬｦｾＭＬｯｭ oni:50oJ:, .')II. .j.ntc) ｩＡｾＧｹ ｦＺＮｾ ［ｯ rry U .. te of C0ns'.: iOil.sness. ［ｬｾｶ･ＮｲｹｴｪＭ ＮｾｬｩＧ outsi.de is \'Jhat it is in Vj.s l.!:siie ｾ ar,'l ;0U,; its ｴｲｬ ＮｅｌＲ ｾ ＮＺ［ｌｚ frt)lT! & tho ｾｩｶｴｮＬｾＮｳ of it ｩｾＭＬｓＸＱＮｲＬ \'jitbin this incidc .. ｾ vGry rea"on is ｳｯｭＧ＿ｴｨｩｮｾ inside. its 8.rd L'o:n Lh'3 ｮｯｩＢｴｾ｣ｩｃＮＺ･Ｎ｣ｶ t':'12 being, \'lhi':::1! for ｴｾｬ［ｽＧＺＮ i:b?t i self belen,;s to t·- is 285 and 21' j.e lmscr i bed (i f eire lJr:lS:;l' iptiorl no\!) ha s ar:v sense) iverse of 00ssibls meanings; any exteriority to it is .. "p" c: ;.;0 Because the phcfJomenolos.;ical r(?duction, rnean:l..n,zless." t 11 l' 0 \J.g b i t S l' a ':; i 0 113 1 ｡Ｇｾ eX.tel' na1 i ty, pl1ilosopb;y t i v it Y, den i est h (; 9.S r 0 S ｾＭ［ i bi 1i t Y a rl;orolls Science of 3eing (vihere in 01 1l sources of jus t ｩｦｾＺ｡ t ion ｮ･Ｈｾ､ to be fO\1.nd 0 f 150. phenoilleDoloLY. This again r9-affirms what we said in our CljAPTEH T1:J 0: II A se 1 f -cons is tent Sc ient Lf1(: ph iJ.osophy must b0 a phl10sophy of' IrrTla,nence". PO"J(.)" or ... ! _ ...... v...... in that by ｾ I:f'1 _ u....C':;> so .... 1 1 S' ph(?!lomenologJ is also !lopen" 'f' '" . Ｇ･ｶｾ｡Ｎｕ ｮ｣ UjA of the 1nt ntiol1ality of consc- iousness, a.nd its hor izon8.1 na ':-:U1'8, phenomer ｯｬ Ｚ ｾｹ fore j.t an oDcn-cndc1 ｰｨ･ｮｯ ｷｮｯｬ ｾｹ _.,.,i.. _ _ Ｌ ｾ ｡Ｈｾｃｯｲ､ｩＮｲｬｾ I,U1k • __ ......._ .... has ｢｣ＺＡｾ of sense-exnlication. Its ...._ _ ... ............. ... ,_ _ . __ ｾ t.o Tfu;'),serJ., is the I'oaU.zation of the lnfini, te telos inheront in :::;e.rluirJ8 ｬ｡Ｚ ｩｨＩｾｯｳ ｬＮｪｨｲ ac-Uvity, Hherein th0 telos of 3ci(::nce provides the n 0'(' rna ＬＧｾ ]. v e phenomenology takes tr lJ t 11 and t lJere\,' i th t1"'.e rl As soon as one to critically analyze ｡ｴｾＸｭｰｴｳ the phenomenology of 0d:nur..d Pusserl, on9 D9come.3 immedietely of j,ts sejuctiv8 and cO:lJpE!llin:; ch3,pacterQ 8.1..ｾｅｲＮＳｊ HussGrliarl pherlomenolozy seems to !Jc-:) a ble to tlconsumell it, Dl"iays \-11th (at least) Bry criticism leveled against t11e S81, ble.r;ce of justifi.:::;aUo:l ｡ｮｾ resolve; it seem.::; to be able to incorporate any criticism while at same ｴｨｾ time sef?mingly ｲ･ＭＺ［ｯＲＺＮｮｩｺ ＬｮｾＧＢ This seems not only to be in line With, but ｣ｨ｡ｲ ｣ｾ･ｲ also to confirm ".. 011' . v it and de ing justice to it.. viewing Susserl1s ｰｨ･ｾｯｭ･ｮｯＱＰｚｙ as our CRAPT 83. O1':E th3 t the pro blems en,; ､･ｲＡＺｾｴｮｊｉｯ ing to ent.er ｾＧ ｬｊＮｳ ･ｲｬＧ s mense. But, as we \<l ･ｶｾｨ ｴｨｯｵｩｾ ｴｬ｢ｲ･ｾｫ ｏｌｾｴｬ "from outside tt \'J8r8 im- ｾＮｲＺ､ ｉｾｯ［ＮＢＬ･ｲｦｵｬ c..S the d1.[, 'ic111- of the self-ccclosecl sphc:re phenomenolosY opens nat ｴＮｾｲＺｰｴＭ yet to see, these problems are no H.:re near as d;:'fJ.:",itt'JC to j WI, jell Eussl.!rl's 1p. It is e'xtremelY diffic 11.t to (151) question j.ts basic character while at the same time at temptl.ng to mai.ntai.n the tld i s ｴＮ｡ｮｾ･ to ｅｵｳｾ［･ｬＧ tl so tha t I'C qlJ.ircc1 sph8re and consumed un::lf2l' the zui.se of s resolvE:. this ｜Ｇｊｲｩｴ ｮｾ In chapter, I find rrry'·,. ＧＺ［ｬ ｣ ｵ､ｩｮｾ se ] .1." ca. ught. yat also the need to say marc ani to ｾｩｴｨ thj.ng unvoi.ced ir. Hus,s<3.rl l s effol'7-.s. ambiguity on unilateral or by" the ［Ｚｊｖｾ <.' n ,-,• 1,1 •• part, f!'.y 0 Ill"" ') V a .l' .__ '1 G. C) _. 10 b ｾL,_J .J.; What we wish to the ｣ｩｲｾ［ｬ ｡ｉＧＮｩ ｴ ｣ｳ +-1.) •./'1 . ｭ｡ｩｮｴ｡ｩｾ .1.. ｾ • this. ｾ･ in ･ｸｰｇ｣ｴｾ､ Cl'E are ｾ＿ＧＺ ｜ｆＧ ｅｩＮＱ OU1' ｾＺｵＮ［ｳ･ｲｬ 0 s thought rot only ｣ｨ｡ｰｾ･ｲＮ feel that these circularities inJicate an UD- v 0 ice d c ire u 1. a l' i t yin c ｡ｰｾＺＮ･ｲ that l'os:onses to .S chapter is that ｴｾｩｳ in ｷｲｩｴ ｮｾ o .. ah'[tys drai-JrJ a1'l1 o.r.t ')'; U' r- '.'>t,'" r- 1 I f<U' more reveaU.DG of tbe chora!'" te'l' than we had of this 1 comm'Snts!1 are not er:coii.ntered in ＧＮ Ａｃｾ of some BSCHllSG c ,herer:t, for I ･ｾ［ｰＨｾｩ｡ｬ ｟ＬＮ i__ ...,...1 if ｉｬｾ Ｇｩｴ Ｚ［ thS30 ｳｰ･ｾｫ \.JG ｾ ｾ Ａｾ S S 8 r lIs t >-10 U Ｚｾ h t i t s e 1. f. 1.11 "t, his \·}i.sh to s>jO\v tho cir f2ularlty of ｾ ｬＱｳ ･ｉＧｬ ｳ Scientific project an:i hO'.J a general way as to how At the ｴｾｩｳ rests on an ｳｯｾ･ circularit 0 ｬｕＱｑｾ ＮＺ ｴｩＰＮｄ･､ circle is spun. 7inally, ｳｩｾｴ we ho ,e to be 3ble to give haps whet l2r!, ｾＺｩ clue as to how (or car be escaped. u t set, \') e n e(; ::l .:; 0 no i e t h.3 t 0 ur c r i t. i C0 1. 153. for \'Jhy one shonld opt for a philosophi2D.l position or system otber than s phenor.lenolog·;. For this reason ｅｵｳｾＢｪ･ｲｬＧ no llopposing viows ll of otber philosophers \.;ill be enter- taj ned. To extend Piis one step further, tail) thaI., Vus.::;erl's the c ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｲＺ ｯｬ ｾｹ '';(1 'vI ish to main- does in fact represent of the [deal of Scientific philosophy. ｊｮｳｵｲ｡ｴｩｯｾ In fact, vie fee that hi.s me'C'-,od, tbe ｰｨ･｛ｪｯｾＢ･ｮｯｬ ｇｩ｣｡ｬ reduction, is thJ most 1ecisive and effective philosophical eVGr devi0ed. ｭ･ｴｾｯ､ 237 As far as that goes, we nef3d to say nov! th3.t nhilo;30"j..icf,llv . - - _ . _ - " , _.._ ... _ _... Ｍ ｾ ｟ ｓＱＩＲＺｊＮｾＺｩｮｦＧｾ _ _ .. _ . . - __....-. I \'Ie find Husserl's.conclusions unavoi1able. However, what we aro ｳｰ＼ｾ［ＩｫｩＮｄｲＺ of as sud) and silent presupposttion not merely ｾＬｨ 288 philoso( y ｈｬｊＮｓｦＸｾＢ ＮＧｑ bllt \f philoso·q. y itself. The hist ry of philosophy (with notable but infrequent .9.nJ after: ienored exeeptlor"s) is the hJ.stgXy_of 289 ＮｑＢｊｾ ＺＩｬｰ ＨｯＮｪｴ｟ｾｒ Rationalism is no here to be taken in the usual SBnse as the means whereby we for example, Ｌｨｳｩｵｾｮｩｴｳ ､ the phi10301::..hy of Continental Hationaltsm from th8t of Briti.sh "based ｅＨＧｃｌｰｩｲ ｾｩｳｭＮ \'/e mearJ simply that ·._hilosop-y is 1pon ll the implicit IIfaith" that order!' (i.o., that it is 8 that order is rationally ､･ｴ ｾｭｩｮ｡｢ｬ･ trIG "..,or1.d tlhas an cosmos and not a chaos) and that by Reasono As Husserl I ./t::4 0 philosophy i.s nothing other 290 than rat ional ism through alJd through. • • 1I a rat ion- constantly repeats, alism in search of II c 1I • • • wherein the task of' ｙＮｊＩｩｶ･ｴｾＮｂ ｬ lOLC!-L.9 f . •• 1I • • ｡ＮＱｌﾣｯｮ･ｪ｟ｶｾＨｬＩＺｉｇｴ 29l ｰｵｾ･ the ¥tat)..Q. of the \'wrJd. 1I "the systematic unfoLlirw of the 292 is set forth. Pbi losop" Y, then, as a fll.lfi llment of its hi. stor leal purpose, aims to be a rigorcus Science of all Being. Philo- sophy, B.S the vocati n of the of Hcason, is in this Husserl had SPl1SG Ｂ･ｴｬｾｩ｣｡ｬ cogni tive demand" rtAtionaU.sm. ｑｾｴ･ｭｰｴ･､ many different approaches to his phenomenology thrOl.J.6!'oU v hi.s phi l.osophical career. On the bas is of his publlsbed and. traus la ted vlOr k:s alone, we ｮ｡ｾ see that he found it necessary to write no les3 than fO}d...t introductions to his phenomsnologj'. (tho CCl.ttcsi?:Xl ｯｦＮ ｂｵｲｾｰ｣｡ｮ Scj ･ｮ｣･ｾ are all subtitlAd as such). His con= stant need. to refol:'(Tj llat.e and reassess h1s \'lritings, coupled with the fact that eva J in his l' his project for ｦ･ｴｩｾ･Ｌ pbenomenology "las e i thaI' ignored or rad ically -ransformed by even his most promisinz stUdent, Hartin HeideG';er, pro- bably lead him to realize more and more explicitly the over- whelmingly enigmatic character of philosophy itself. In an articcl written Ln 1934, he admits ｾｨ｡ｴＺ I ｫｮｯｾ of COlrse what I am ｾｮｩｶ ｲｴｳ for under the title of philosophy, as t'J8 goal aid fL,ld army Hork. And "Gt I do not 1:.1"!0\0/. \']hat aut.onomous ｴｾｩｲｪｫ･ｲ 1188 every bean satisfied \'lith ｴｾｬｩｳＬ . is "l-:rJo'.·Jled?:8'? For what autonomous thinker , in his ｰｨｩｬｯｳ ｰｾｩｺ ｮｧ life, has tlphilosophytl ever to be an entgma? ｾ･｡Ｎｳ･､ 293 Russerl had come to the t -18 cons,:anJ t\ ,HYj I where he realized once again ｾｯｴｮ . jt pe:c. ls"sn t ｾ ｃ｟ＭＧｲＨｾ｡ 294 0 tl f t· Ｂｳ｣･ｰｾｬ｣ｬｳｭＬ •• . to the establishment of a irrationalism o.nd fl1ysticu,;nll rigorous Science of Being. However, the constant ･ｭ ｲｧ･ｮｾＸ of the enigmatic character 01 p ilosophy provided for -1U3581'l a resurgance of the dcwand for a more ,:;o:rprehensivG Eusserl's \-'lork, cri tiWte 5.nevitably had a prescribed and unque s t ionsd goal: -'-0. ＧＳｳ｜ Ｎｐｊ ［ＩＮｾｑ Ｎ ｓｲ Ｚ §Jl.J.J_d be established ＨＧＬｶｨｩ｣ ｾ ＮｓｏｉｙｦＨｾ Hiu8t include l if it is not to be absurd, faith th3.t it d 3' er·rnirJp.d oh -ad of t Tha tSc ience ｩ･ｮ｣ｾＮ tme. All of ｧ ｵＭｾ be establ.ished) is quest ioning itlhich ｴｲｾ･ Busserl undertook fell within the unquestioned necessity and possibility of the goal to bg reached. Russerlts faitl in the possib.Llity of Science rests on a faitb 1n ':he ultimate intelligibility of the cosmos. Quss8Il ｣ｯｮｳｾ｡ｮｴｬｹ questioned how to make his Rationalism (his grasp of the cosmos by Reason) more ｲ｡､ｩｾ ｬＮ The rational faith (that there is a cosmos)· which lends cr0edence to the possi.bU.ity . of this was itself never questioned. ｲｾ ｴｩ｣｡ｬｩｴｹ We ｾ｡｣ notice this tenden y in a absolute grollDQing of Sc' ence, El1sserl ｡､Ｚｲ ｩＮｾＺｳ already ｰ｡ｳｾ･ thDt first 'de must not pr;:,suppose even its possibility". he ｩＮｬｾ ｭ･､ｩ｡ｴ･ｬｹ 1:0es on to say that ｈｾ •• Il • • • 295 at Yet this does .lot mean that vie ･ｾｮｵｯｄ･ｲ have run u ue the general aim of F;l'O'J.nding science ｾｨ･ｪＮｬＧ course, he once again re-affirms this. states ·tl'}Ett: •• owe have lost siebt of the demand, so serioustn!;I.c1.C-J at the beginn.:Lng Ｎｾ namely that an 9J291:ic,. ｟ｾｌﾣＮ ｫｮｯＧＬｩｊｬ Ｚ｝ｾ･Ｌ 9.S thCJ only ｴ ｾｇｮｬＮＱｩｮｇｬｹ scientific kn m·ll e ':1 '; c It be a ｾ he i v ｾ c.l; b ｾＱｕＧ e ＱｓＮｙＲＭｊｾＬ ｬｊｓＧｾＱｄＮ ly d __ Q..;tJQ2.d.....Lt.. 297 In splte of all dLfficultics, tn spite of the COilll'J.(3xity of the task, the demand for ScieGce remains intact! The question of the present section is to ask in ｈｵｳ ･ｾｬ ｳ and moreover, wh8ther it shows ｰｨ･ｮｯｾ･ＱＰ ｯｧｹＬ need to asle \·}hethor phtlosophy as a rigoLus ｓ｣ｩ･ｮ｣･ｾ 8. is tbus shown undor'mines Husserl' s \·11'J8.t phj lOS9Pll:L:...ｾ｣ｪｲＮｑｬＺ＼ｮｩＱＮｌＹ for and thsrefore as h.:JVC held thus far and still hold ole that a self-consistent Scientific philcsop y must he a :i-.he '7,oa1 of r·hi 10sor:.. .ｾ ＿.Ｎ［ﾧｾｮＲＮｪ［Ｚ.ｩｦ｟ｾｈＳ goal of phi.J.osophy as 3cierlce i.s i<llla: conld be called il18 All Being can be made the 0 ject of rational insight. Under 157 " transcendental reflection, all Being forms an intelliunity civen ｾｩ｢ｬ･ of trans is ｇｮ､･ｮｾ｡ｬ ｷｩﾷｇＡｾ the ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｩ a1 Immanence 298 In short, the cosmos ｳｵ｢ｪｊｷｴｩｾ ｴｹＮ ｩｮｴ･ｬ ｩｾ ｢ｬ･ (i.e., it is a cosmos and not a chaos, and it is Immanent j.n c(;nsciousnes. afJd thereby 'i'his ltprinciple" of .l\ea.:>on is i;11e definition and prerequisite of the possibility of a riGox'ous of ｴｯＮ ｾＱＮｬｙ ｓ［Ｚ ｩｾ･ This nec8rsitatcs that one 101d that there is ｂ･ｩｮｧｾ no essent.ial llopa.que.ness" j.n Being and that Bej.r<; is 299 infi.nit.E:ly clarifinble. from which Euss2rl never If v!G ｮｾＺ｣ ･ＩｾＮｰｲ･ｳ Ｎｾｯｮ to ｷｾｶ･ｲ｣､Ｎ fird. no Reason (and mlst thereby This gi"es ｡､ｾｩｴ IIZ:COlU1d tl for the principle ｯｾ its necessary opaqueness in the faCt2 of phenon;enologic£ll grounding) Eus3'-'rl' s phenomenology canDot lay claifu to the r: j. IS 0 l' ｾ 0 \.)' '. i C "1 and genuine principle of it a S Dire s • It cannot 38["IS2. ｾＰ｡ｳｯｮ＿ already contains ｾ ｩ ｴ ｮ ｩ t,his noti.on of a ｾｬＧｯｵｮ､ｩｧ ｾＧﾷ［ｨｳ､Ｚ ｲ｡､ｩｾ｡ｬｮ･ｳ and be 3:::: 1. e nee i nl.:h e .f \111 is ent::d.J.ed itJ . ground ing of ｾ･ ｊｾＺＱｦ sec that thA pri1ciple itself its scope ｴｨｾ fiotion of a grou d- is only le,::;itim.::1.te (Le., gro 1H!d- 158. ad) if the itself is grounded. To grond .he ｰｲｩｮｾｩｰｬ･ of aeason by ｰｲｩＮｮｾｩｰｬ･ is to adopt the of ti.n1G. on an ｲｾ･ｅｊ､ ｧｬｹｕｾｲｻＮ［｡ｳｯＮ Ｙｳ for its adoption and accept its validity ahead ｰｲｩｮｾｩｰｬ･ v:G say t, l wn that Eus.scrl's projecv rests prosupposition? ｕＱｾｵ･Ｓｴｩｯｮ･､ ｩｾＮｳ･ｬｦ on the prin::ipla of iJ.eason \'lhicl1 Eead '.-ie say, counter to t! ｩｳｾ is, that it res.s ｔｾ｡ｴ Llat is not questioned? the r;rinciplc of cannot be :{ua:.;t ioned bac:clU.sc of' its inconteBt2.tly· R02S0D GV ideE 'ail Only if !lto que.sl tonI! c:3.n only mean lito sock ｬ ｡ｴｵｲｾ ＿ reasons and evidence". IlInco!:Jtsstable eVidence!! presupposes teEl. to ｳｬＩｾＮｩＺ ｮ Ｍｲｰ Ｚｾｵ｣ｬｊ (2 qU':33 :;:lcming om·! ､ﾷＺｾＬｲｩＧｦＮ･ an ex-teL';'" becomes as seekir.'; ovidarlee) senseless. To questIon the principle of Reason o:Jly if Vie 2.1101.'; the pl'ineip18 t ｳ｣ｮＺＭｾＧＳＱｃ Ｌｳ｣Ｇ it .i8.t questioning ｢･｣ｯｭｾｳ def'i.ne ｩＮｴ ｾ m·Jn seli',-cp.18stiotd,ng EtS a sG8kin.3 l'casons. HusscrJ_ defi.nitel;:: feels that his f.aith in t.he of Be ins i tsel£' "has geoi r,:,ascn" 5 a r ＨｾｲＮＱｳｯｮ shown via the phenOlilerlol02ica1 ｭＰｴｾＡｯＺ ＱＮ ｡ｬｲＨＡｾｬ､ here Yet "to SOOV)!! meaLS lito seek evideneo or l'easons". CIJfJ i<{C le:;·· itardze or ;ill ti::fy the fa.i.th his i·/hich cal] be ｰｨ･ｮｯｾ｣ｲｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ ｰｲｯｾ･ ､ｾｲ･ :-l lJ sserl has Ll Science if al.ready and ahoed of tiMe rE-stricts lIto justif'yll aid lito logitamize" to Ilgiving reaso_Js"? It seems that once \-Je eni:;or into t116 circle of pber,o!;'eno lo=.;y, one e \·,18 ar e) so to speak II of the fa i th l1 , the questioninG of ｾｨ ｰｲｩｾ｣ｩｰｬ･ of becomes impossible, ｒ･Ｒｾｏｇ for the principle already prcsecribas the pos3ibilities of Ｌｰ･ｾＮｬＭ ﾷ Ｈ 1\.1. (an,l .1' ..(. r.n'.1. r'r" ｬｾ 0 lr.U -l"t CO:Jl • a.. <::'. c..... . ﾷｬｾＮＧ･ Ａ " _ .i;.",.,<=>t pｾ -:;< to t"L-JCI c'ue"!-l'or's poe-ed) i ...:.. , J ,." -.CJ.n.,-,\·./r..".1.' ," 1! [ Eusserl's self-criticism always questioned, prescribes ｽｾｬ･ ｾ ｾ neces3arily falls ｾｮ nat lre ard ex':en!: of' critique 1 itself. To question r,:'i" faith is to ｓｕ｢Ｚｬｾｩｴ to it, for see the clearest. example of FllS:3erl's se rl 1)ctive for \'Ie • ｮ｡ｴｵｲｆｾＬ of arC:' emb::ti'i-1.S3Ed by the fact that ir, the face 'I'll!::: voracious and cOt:'1p llsive consl1!"nptiofJ of any possible criticism defines tte difficulties we have in criticizing Husserlian phenomenology, for we are faced with a ｾ｡ｩｴｨ which is, it secms 5 impossible to question. And therefore, our questions are immediately and easily " ru l ed out of Hi th rogard to this ui1qe ust ioned fa i tl l ? may vie say nm<J t\)a t ｴｬｾ is f2.i th in ｩＮｾ｣｡ｳｯｮ is more f mdamental than Reasen itself? It is not quite this ｳｩｾｰｬ･Ｌ for here we are faced \'lith t"c initial ullintel1iZibility of vJh;:Jt cOl.:'ld be sed'ctive circularity arj.scs, for we are left ｾｯｮ､･ｲｩｮｧ 160. hOVJ or even whe ther He can val id ly as k tl\'lha t do we mca.n by calling fai th more ｦｵｮ､｣ｵｮｴｾ ｡ｬ than Reason?" If' some "validity" can be attributed to our ｱｵ･ｳｴｩｯｮｩ ｾＬ this ou.tlined j.n 0 11' itseJf. an ｣ｩｲ｣ｵｬｾｲｩｴｹ defies all four of the ｒｅＢｆｱＮｾ ｣ Ol'JE. LQt ｵｮ､･ｲｳｴＸＮｮ､ｩｮｾ of its f0110\'1 th.:Ls up: I.lS in nature •• 0 ofol' to leave this na.ture unqu'3sU.Of\cdc • 01;:; to d:':lD'" its Scien·Li.fic 300 character,l! If phenof1enology aoes Dot rDdica11y question nat\ue, i: is not :lts O,'JD lIto C·llc-"r;C"rl 1 ....><J..). ll nl;''''''''''' ｾ o. i l .:.;> ·It.O _ ｲＺｩｾｯｲ ｬ ｳＱｹ Scientific. But if ＬｾｬＧｶ･ ｾ ｲＧ Ｎｯｰ ｾｯｮｳ ＢＧｾＬ a or G"l'o"·.er;0.e v._ ｾ S loDce \'Jhich is to be established bv _. " ls presupposed as valid (Le. natlE'8 of (2). 1/.)e Ｎｩｴｾｩｬ Ｑｾｨ･ ｱｵ･ｳｾＺｩｯｮｩｊＱｧ ｾ ...ｾ ｴｾｩｳ ｇｵｾｳｴｩｯｮｩＮｾ i"ha' v_ t . _ ._ _=..;.J, as "estab1ished ll ) 'n the itself. h:J.·e sail that "Phenomeno1.o[.;y must contain Htthln the grou.nd of its o'n pos"'ibility, for to l.eave tho.t eround unrevealed is to ChHlY tts Scientific cha1'- 301 actel'tl • If it docs not reveal its oVJn gr'ourld., 1.L. is fJot rigorously Sc.i..enti.fic. But if "to reveq1 r1 means "to ｢ｲｩｮ ｾ to a.bsolute evidence", that .:kienc(j \\lhich is of that revealing itself (r revealling ',.}o.ich deman s Scientific evidence). (3). ,To have saL'l tha.t "Ph;!!omenology - must contain .Ili.t./in _--- ｩｴｾＮﾧＧｬｦ :Lts nec'3ssity, for to OY/n ｬｾ ＸＮｶｇ that necessity unquestioned is to deny its Scientific character. 11 This 302 has thr same character as j.n point ｱｵ･ｳｴｩｯｮｩ ｾ (1) above. We will bave more to say below about the motivation which 10ads to phenomenology and how it necessarily falls outside of its 3cope. If its motivation does in thi s ,<Jay IIfa1l outside ll , then the very source of pheno- menology is Lranscenlent to it. (1+). \rJe have sa:i.cl abo'/8 that IITbere cali be ｮｯｴｨｩｮ［Ｍｾ is radically ｵｮｩＮＨＩｴ ［ｬ ｩｧ ｴｨｾＬＮ VlblCb i4ithin the scope of HllSScl'lian , 1 I• I. ''J 1 . t ,. h t'· 1 pnenomeno_ogy nlS \\e S t 1. 1 J_ aGree. Ｌｾ l.e t we a 1 so said tl at may fall !out",ido l of its grasp, for Ａｬｉ｜ｯｴｨｩｮｾ such a 'transcendence' would deny the possibility of cert303 atnty and tbereio/i 1.h Q'C;ny its 3cientific chara,::.: ter. 1I We shall have more to 3ay about this below as well, for i:ie nm! hold that its 1:irime motiv8.tiol1. - J ｾ ｃ｣［ＮｾｴＱ _ _ ｾ｟ＭＮＭＮ ＵＮｲｾ ＺｾｦＭＧ｡｣ｯｮ _ of its scope. All of this merely provides us with an incredibly vaCLlOUS ･ｾＺＧ ｩｰ of informR ':10110 I Ie ft Hi th a merC' "log leal c r icular it l .It e seems that \'18 are Th is rema ins the case unless vJ8 can open this tightly knit circle alJd. 1l}' show its ramifications and contours. Let us look now at how this circle is spun and how it ｰｨｩｬｾ Ｎ Ｚ Ｎ｢ｊＺＧ＾ phenorneno- ｩｮｦｬｵ･ｮｾ･ｳ :::orrectly ffiDsl.at2d, in t'ne o1'ig1ntn" ｾ I'.•.... l' ! 0 t : r 0 t h Co r .1-t. h r 1 U. 1""'1' Ｎｾ V " r ｾ a 1 .1".".;.::...6 ' .; SCiCD2El, science of the uni 1 ers8, of the all-encompassing unity of all that is. " a .'L 0 .. C' .:.; "t:.. f'1 ....C'\..;:: " t]...l ,::..':) , -lL, ｾ ｾ -:.-l .J.. JV\ｾ ro >;-) _0 '0< • 0: j t... ,j 304· '"OvJh0re is 2:1mund Ｑｬｲ･ｳｩＬｾｵｅ s faith in th8 pm'JElr of his phEl:l0'11CilOlogy, as a radi"CAlly self-critical Rationali0m, more evident than in the Crisis of European in the Various manuscripts from the same period. Herein bE! says that nprecj.. sely this lack of K.Q....l!llJL':':lt).0JJfl.1i ｾＬｬ on all sides 1.5 t1'iS sourco of m"if) I s now unbearable lack of clarity about his own existence • •• " 305 • This unclarity and lack: of rationality has ｌｾ ｣ｴｬＱｲ･ＮＬ for Husscrl, as he calls 1t ion the> Vjel._na ch,U'8c te r of a a 1a c k 0 II. • • the .306 '1A sc rue t i ve blaze of l'l£t....Qi..fa i. tL'1.l! f fa 5. t h in ". • .) h e c rJi!. phi los 0 ph y to life seeks to be arld ought '0 bo d evotwl. 307 tl Vl hie h 0 \J r It is precisely F"i s burni.D::1, unqu.estioned faith in 2eason that leads t,t Ule II S .ni.nn.tn,;1'-' or the C ',re Ie II w - enco lnter ed a bOVG. We wish now to give A oversimplified indication ｰｾｲｨ｡ｳ of how we feel that this is accomplished an1 what effects it has on phenomenolcgy ' s self-interpretation. ·:Je \>11s11 to parallel the tlspi.nninp; of t of Reason to a peculiar form of the discovery of an an err 0 r, the r e L: ro ｾ .11'V'\G' . ｾｬ Ｉ the ll O,·t U. 01:' 1. npo,·'jr·,·s ｾ ; •• \lel. ｐＳｾＬｴ to the discov0ry of "'I e s h 11 c a 11 a 'vJ 1';;:1 t beliefs formerly ｨ･ｬＧｾ r e t ﾣＮｑｾＧ "about beliefs are now beld to have of thE object whicb \o,Jhi.ch domanus that evident in ｾｵ｢ｳ･ｱｵ･ｮｴ f.f Bet e d r:: IJ.L Tbese ｯ｢ｪＨｾ｣ｴｬ Ｎ ･ｲ ｯｲｾ ｣ｯｮｾ｣ｩｯｵＮＳｮ･ｳ cirr:-le ll ,8 ｾ･ have now discovered is then Ｇｾ ｬＧ･ｶｩｯｵｳ opi.nion 'oe and be branded as alvavs hAVing Ｎ｟Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ＭｾＭ ｟ＮｾＭＮ ｟Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ｢ｾ･ｮ ､ｾｅｪＭｮ｡ｲ｢ !lerrOI"l in error. put _0 this another way, we now retroactively posit the object as Iltro.nscending lt previous opinion and also as e1' I' or"). ＱＭｾｯｲ CWV 81', thEL.9 ｢ＡｪｾｑＮ ｩｳ｣ｏＮｙ｟ｑ ﾣＮＹ､ is 1'e tr ( ac t i v ely lead to the realization of its lltrue nature ll • Its nature not (',ffee 8c1 !lin realit y ll by eithc:r t.he error in or the discovery and Itcorrectionll of this error. ｪｵ､Ｎｧ･ｭ ｮｾ ＱＶｾﾷＮ We wish to hold that a similar form of consciousness occurs j.n 1:he il sp inr:si.n'5: of -he circle of Raason ll • Yot th is form of conse iou3ne s scar r ie s ",1 i th in itself an added and essential moment. It is not merely here L: this. Russerl' s ing deman'.:1 for Science and ｵｭ＾ｊ｡ｾｬ･ｲ his faith in its lossibility and necessity lead him to " uncr itically" posit t.he goal of a ri,r;;orous Science of Being a3 the telos of his life work; Moreover, as the te 1os of ph 110sor,hy, as J(,lle te los of consc iousne ss itself. As we h?ve , the natlre and ｳ･ｾ of all ｳｾｯｰ･ critique for Husserl is guided by and defined by this talos. ｓｩｮｾ･ t e talos (Science) defines the na ure of critique (Le., it demands -l:".hat criti.quG :':ust b a Scien ific critique), the telos itself cannot be legitimately critized ( which now means Sc critisized) without ｹｬ ｡｣ｩｦ ｾｮ･ it; it is in this sense ｰｲ･ｳｵｰｾｯｳｩｮｧ that. 'de call this !,ositin,oJ ｬ ｵｮ｣ｲｩｴ ｣＼ｾｉ｜ｬＮ By Hhat vIE: (one that nsets a [;oe.1" tOViards I'; .iell i.t aims) the go ,1 of Science is posited s the guic1in:; motil/Dtion for all phenomenological deccriptions and critiques; all pheno- 165. and t.herc,,1\·lith iljsL.'.t into tle esse-,tiel ｴｲｾ･ The "settins of fhis ｰｲｯｇｲａｳ ｩｾｰ ｴｾ goal" is in ( of Ｎ ｾ Ｎ ｟ Ｍ ｟ Ｎ 1:Jay progressive. l.S which ｣ｯｮｑ｣ｩｯｬｾｮ ｳ Ｌ Science Hl:ich is to be co ＮｾＧ .laL:n ｳｴｲｷｾｴｬｈｐｓ ..._ _.._ _ ..... _ _ ｾ ｱ Ｍ the ｾｯｳｩｴｳ of ｾｯ｡ｬ displays itself as a ｾｬＧ｣･ｨ ＬＩＭＨ･ｲ I or 'ccI 'le f') t'.nat;' t '<1':' mac t·ers ae sca.<:e In p,·lcno») J ｭ･ｮｯｬ ｧｩｾ｡ｬ 0 descriptions ( he univorse of all conceivable Beir.lG) not only "is ther0", bu.t al '0 that it °has" a certain essential nature discoverable Rational ｴｨｲｯｵｾｨ thu positing of the goal becomes ahsurd, for it ｾｯｵｬ､ the goa ｴＺｮｏ｜､･ ｾ ･ He of' Sc ient i f ie mean thst \ e wish to reach a bout a It un i ver' s e lt is not 3cj.entifica1.1y kno·wable. ｊＩＨＭｾｬｩＹｖＨＺ bolief in t\-\ls beliof in 2. Ｌﾷ ｏＡｾｩｓｏｃ is derived the and nBcessity of the ｬ･ｧｩｴ ｾ｡｣ｹ required in the ､ｩｳ｣ｯｾ･ｲｹ l.ch this ｆｲｯ ｛ｾ ma-!:-ters at 1;1'1e \'111 ｳｴ｡ｫ･ｾ ｾ･ｴｨｯ､ of this cosnos (Science as tne search for rlational insight). '.1'his faith j.n 1\e8.son, therefore, is active (th(' ｣ｮ ｳ｣ｩｯｾＳ Ｘｾ Ｎ ｾＮ･ ｮｰＮｲｯ［ｾＱﾷ･ｳ ｩｶＨＳ proceedure pr'o br1 reSS1",Q \. . : : .ＱﾷＧＰｾＱﾷ ｬｏ ﾷｊＷ 0 Bein3 is at ｹｴｩｳＳｾｊＨ ･ｮ ｯｮｾ･ oJ .. ｬ Ｎ ｾ Ｌ of the ｯｲ ･ｬ｡ｾｩｶ･ to t ｩｾｾｯ｣ﾷＺｪＮｬ - of a· ＮＺ｣ｵｯｲ ｾｦﾷｬｲ G. ｾｯ｡ｬ movement-H) retroactively· ｭ･ｴｨｯ､ ｬｯｾｩ｣｡ｬ _ ｾｨＰ [ositing of ｡ｬｾｯ o. retro- of 3cicncc demands a specific 10 posited - ;JC......l8.1"',('(.:) - ｾ t.e retr03stive positing of 'hG of ｾｹｴｩｬ ｢ｩｳ ｯｰ ::-nd les;i.tiffiacy 9f the plu.'sual of Science ard the 166. possibility, ne.essity and legitimacy of a pnr-icl1ar ｾ l;ype 0 f' 1 ｰｵｲｳｬＮ｡ｾ C'0C " lent.l1l.C ex;" l'le:J. j;10n ' ) .L'n. This possi bili ty on ｾ［ｴ＿ of C1 ｩＳＢＺＰｐ＼ Ｚ ｾｲ､ｮ｣ "'ssity nnd D(;C • ｾｲ［ 0'" ii'!nce ＺＩｾＱ e of be inn; se if·· j \) s t ifying only self-fol'Getfn.lness i1hereo,y -hf: "orii::inallt tA kes m::ans ｮ｣ｾＱ for 0cience and the original faith in Science becomes for- gotten. That iS t the ｰｲｯｾｲＸｳ ｩｶ｣ movement of ｣ｯｮｳｾｩｯｵＳｮ･ｳ Jhich posits the goal of Science in the first place is ＧｾｬＡ･ overlook in fEtvoar of ｰｲ･ｾ［ｃＺｌ goal i ipU.on fO.r S·.;ient-· fic an.:) its ?:etroactiv<3 ＧＺｾ･ｬｦ ･ｾ［Ｚｬｊ ｩＨｾ｡ｴｩ｟ｯｬＢ Tt1C dema d. and .L ... 0 f ') '," .\, '" Ii ..Lnt, 0'" lu \ - '" I J -{-ｾ 'rV" ｾ '.. itself "guilt I J' - rlJ"::'>C' e '.L 1"."1 '-,ｾ O.l.. ｦｲｯｾ 1 De the nual for I II ..:. ,.. ｾ ",1 1..':'>0 IJ. J.. , ... 1 -.i 0 ｓｾｩ･ｮ｣･ posited ttat ｰｾｯ［ｲｯＳｳｩｶｾｬｹ 1'8.11 r' ,-1 U 9 _. U ' lit of :;: precisely ｰＸＮｲ｡ｬ ｅｾｬ naivety 'tihich eac'i.y tbere ll • In phenC':n8nology, i' se2iflS that i-Ie oV8r- ass, in naive jevotcdnoss to tte goal of 3cience, one t'le immense l.ntent ional ache iVGi":1ents involvod in ｯＧｬ｣ｲｬｯ Ｎｾｳ the of tlat goal and the positing of it. ｣ｯｮｳｾｩｯｵｳｮ･ｳ To cOl1cli.de., ClOR r ly. ｔ ｬ ｾ \oJe may nO'.,,' sec __JI12,tJ.l.£?!J, of :ius se r 1 ian tl ｾｨ･ circlB" more p lCnO'TIe rL lo;y CSe ient if i c cta1re :_"_1:........ (ol-1-" vdv OJ". ('fl."]_ t.:. Ｎｊ］Ｍｾ 00C1CJfl'·r,) ..... ;1".;/ e 'd (the mho Ｍｾ ..... goal of Science) is 1"'g'til:1ate1y im'(3S :.1;31. ted by ｴｬＧｾ both demanding that it is from the otbe l' t.hat it i;a ins its legitimacy. 308 By positing thA goal of 3lience as an infinite t los. the c11'c1e / spun it:::elf has an "inf'Lnite diameter ll "infini.te ｴｾｬＮｓｫ ｉ , .... a r .lgorOL1S ｪｊ｣ ＮｇｮﾷＺｾ･ fo1' , pre32ribing By positins the 30a1 as ｾＩｨｩｬｯｳ ｰｨｹ｣ 0 f a J｟ＭＲｾＮｊｬｧＬ 1 -, . ' it "conSIJ.rnes lt 0.11 rossib1:: alternatjves and makes the d.8iftc.wd tho.-L it has and C8.n bc...ve no " olJ.tsiu/;1I 0 c .nnoL escape ard in 1iJhich it canriOt be c8.u'.;ht. He shall. lio\'! ｳＨｾ･ Lh;} t V.l'n':l t appeared in our first soction of this chapter to be e. mere "10;ica1 circle, has an ｯ･ｶ ｲｷｨ･ｬＮｾｩｮｾ ･ｦｾ･｣ｴ on phanorenology's self-interpre+ation. The faith in the possibility of philosophy as a task, thD.t ｩｳｾ in t'12 ｾＩｯｳ ｩ｢ ｬｩｴｹ of nrJiversal kiJO\v ledge, is somet\: in2 ',.I e cannot Ie t ,go .. 309 We feel -hat the influence of Husserl's fqith 168. in Reason, which is to his burning faith ｣ｯｲ ･ｬ｡ｾｩｶ･ in the possibility of l'hilosophy, has an enormous iDl- pact on phenomenology's ｳ･ｬｦｾｩｮｴ･ｲｰ ･ｴ｡ ｩｯｮＮ ｾＬＱ can, by no means, expect to cover all of these or the full ramification of any of these on the present ｩｮｦｬｵ･ｮｾ･ｳ We wish, merely, to list a few of these effects. ｣ｯｮｴ･ｸｴｾ 0.) .. Husser 1! s faith in ｾ ･ ｡ ｳ ｯ ｮ is extent that in self interpretation, ｰｨ･ｮｯｾ･ ｯｬ ｧｹｴｳ 1J.-p o rva.3 i ve to the Reason shows itself to be a IDiverse' and necessary in all ｬ ･ｊ ＮＺｭｾ＿ｮｖｉ ｾ JＢ Ｉ ｃ Ｇ ｓ Ｈ ｾ ｩ Ｇ ｃ , \ • ,,:l '. ｾ .;. .L ｣Ｇ ＮＩＧｲｾ '" --' J .b , ｣ｯｮＳｲｾｩｯｵＮｳｮ･ｳ and all consciou;' ｬｩＱＮ｣ｾ J'n _l/ • 0 goes as far as to say that: has an essential, rational fcrill, this "essence!! cc1.rJ be ｢ｉＧｏｕｧｾｬｴ ,0 sel.f-givennass oy Reasonts seL.-1'e1:18c .ion. ＱＮＶＹｾ Therefore, since all conscious processes are essentially ｒＨｾ｡Ｎｳｯｮｴｳ become.:; 1'e roacttvely the mode of ｓ｣ｩ･ｲＮＨｾ･ "reason", ｳ･ｬｦｾｲ･ｦｬ･｣ＺｴｩｯｮＮ In short, ttHeality" is ta[{eD to be determinato (si.rlce conscious ｰｲ｣＼ｾ･ｓ ｇＳ llhave ll ､ｾｴ･ｲｭｩｮ･､ an essence), and since Reality is so Roas n t it has a rationally by ､･ｴ ｲｭｬｮ｡ｾｬ･Ｌ essential ｳｴｲｬｊ｣ｴｵｲ･ｾ (2) a Seen from tl'i'lithin the circle" (\'lhic'h is 11m,} the only rigorous and Scientifically legitimate way "to see") tbJ motivation or l-ISOlU';Sll of Eu,sserl' s ｰｨ･ｮｯｾ menology is not the need for Science, but the goal of ScielDcE"), 8 gual \vbich retroactively posj.ts "essences" as que s t ion 0 f thfJ 11 Begtnning H i. s tl1 en and wt thout QQ j, 'o§.Q question a question of the Scientifically eraspable basis or "begi.nninz" of cogJ.lition. Unti.l 'i'-le read) an apodictic (i.e., truly ScientiLic) beginning, we have not yet begun. The circle thereby has a definite effect on phenomenology's !- • 'lJIOn • as a rl.go·'ous and its subsequent self-interpreta- ｾｯ｡ｬ -, • ..:>Clsnce 0"':f ｯｾｮｬ･ｪ r,. T f ..:..11 defines the essential natt-ue of 'trigor!l "source", ltfnndamen lJm lt , "beginning", ｩｬｯｲｩｧ ｮｬ ｾ a + 8,C- '" th 'I e c i .rc 'L e l:Gronnd"? Ｂ｢｡ｳｩｾｦｉＬ All of these have a prescribe? meanine witnin phenomenolozy's self-interpretation. 170. (3) .. Follo:Jing this, from It'vi thin the circle tt , phenoＱＲﾣＮ ｑｲ［･ＺＧ＿Ｎｾ menology ['IUS t say that the .:t-:..nclomQ.ptldill is not the ｣Ｑｴ＿ｓｾＮＹＧｹ･ｸＺＮｙ of but tht'1 ＳｳＮＺ＿･ｾＫｩﾧｓ｟ｑＧＺＢＹＮ The proceedure of pheco:lJenolo -; ic'3.1 explic.::.-: t ion is t.here by 1 eces sar j.ly ｾｳ ･ｮ｣･ｳ a Scientific explication (as a search for or meanings) and this eX91:Lci::;tion in no 1Jlay t1infllloncesll the eSCen"e discovered. ｔｾ｡ｴ is determinate, ｒ･｡ｬｩｾｹ is, since the need for a method whic) merely shows forth this det8rrnination and in no 'Y-lay "intorpretes it tt , is re- quired. (4) 0 That the proe'2edure of ｔＮｨＸｮｯＮｾｧｬ ｑｊＮ is based ｵｾ ｾ｡ｴｩＹｊＱ ｏＨ Ｎｌｾ ＱＭＲＮｾｬ ｩｑﾣＧｾｴＺｩＮ ｑ ｬ on a p1'eV101)3, llnvoiced ｉＡＮＱﾷＺｅＡｮｓｬｾＱ ｮＮｑＱ ＲＮ ｾＺ Ｑ｟ｴｲｭＮｬ ﾭ (the IJrogre.ssive movement of' COl1::>cj.ousness 1.'Jhich posits the goal of Science and thereby implicitly believes in a. 'JC ienU.f:i.ca 11y de termin" ble cosmos \\ih l.cb demands Scientifi.c explication) is totally ruled out. Even if "1'1 is 1.-1el'e the case, Husser 1. ｾＧｏｈ ld ma intain dla t the it!1pl ie it belief in Science can be (Scientific lly) explicated within p11encJnlenol.ogy itsolf, Hence, a " p heno!nc.;rJolo<::;y of phenomen··· ｏｬ Ｚｾｹｈ is ｾｩｴｨｩｮ ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹＮ ｡ｬ ｾ･｡､ｹ ｐｉＧｾｳｯ｣Ｚ ｩ｢･､ as & II .1;he1'.' level" problem (5). Sinc:e tl.e llessences" are . . . osited as ｢･ｩｮｾ t'alrcady there!1 to bc disco') ered and d escr i bed, Eus3er 1. sa ys that 171. the eS3cncc is: • • • prior to all It c r!ceptstl i.n the S8Dse of verbal significatioD3; indeed, as pur con epts, these musJ be made to fj.t the eidos. 312 In self-interpretation is presupposed ｰｨ｣ｮｯｭ｡ｮｯｬ ｾｹｬｳ a definite role of ｬ｡ｮｰｾＧＩ｡ｇ･ [lS subservier!t to that vlhicrl is to describe. In this role is also prescribed ｬ｡ｮｧｵ｡ｧｾ a certain view as to the possible usage and nature of 1. aneuage. V1]ji.ch is utilized if, thc discovery of essences is totally subserv:Lent to and g!J.idcd by the impl lcit os.senee t.o be discovered by variation. In ｴｾｩｳ phenomenology's self- interpretation, then, is eri9C ad a relegation of imaginatioD to [{eason. (7). Since, by the progressive movement of faith in 3c:ience, t.he essentiall. strl1ctures of. consciousnes:3 ,",-'CI '·o·sl·teel "''''J J. ....:. l')' . -. ｾ Cl (l. of ､ｾＲＭｾ ｾＮ ｡ｰＧ｝ｾｯＭ ｾ ..... .1 b t1 ll -t-,Dre a lr'-'acly -. l;. ｾ ........ .... h(3 pl'ocec::s of ,t/' I J ).",.' . The notions of licrentivity" ar-d rlint.3rpre·- ta t ion!' in phenomeno logy t s pI' oc Ged I1re ar e ｰｲｯｾｲ･ｳ ｩＮｶ･ The "crcc:.tiviLy" of the Vi ,lolly d ismi.s sed. movement of conscious- ness ("i'Jhich. i'J"en nresllD,oosed and thereby overlooked, I .. l. " 172 .. retroactively demands that be seen as a ｰｨｇｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹ ｢･ｾｯｭ･ｳ process of discovery) itself to be discovered and 3 ｯｾｨ･ｲｳ one item among explicated. ｩ･ｾｴｦ｣｡ｬｹ (8). To expand on this, tVe ｹＮｾｭ :.;ay t.,at in phenomenology's S8 lf' - inter pI' ete t ion, si enG f[t i tl'l in Be ienee and fa i th in Reason are t.ber.lselves moments of ltfc, they ｣ｯｮｳｾｩｯｵｳ too have an eS,3(5r,Lial rlCl. .:.nre. ':,'e rr:ay say also tha. Ｑｾｨ･ Sci.enttfical1y di3cov8I':,ble "essense" of faith in Reason is t, Ｍ ＧｾＭ Ｍ Ｍ ＭＧＭ Ｍ Ｍ ＧＭ｟Ｎ 'w hie h __ (j Ｚｾ flbHSis of that t'e.ithｾＭ ｟Ｎ 'tselfl! ... ｾ e f'i n e;:; -':; 11 e nat Ul' e 8. 0 f ｾ since it is Be ience , ba sis. "'h for Sc ience . at. 1S, of t.hat faith in Heasoll 1.8 the reaSOfl (llcssenee") of that fai.th. l;'aith eann t be the basis of [teason, for "to be a basis" has a meaning pres'::l'ibed Jy Reason. To follow this line and to say that Reason is ba3ed on faith is to be committed to a self-contra-:1ictory (an) ｾｲｹ non- ..,. ,. f) scepticism. Ihe sphere of 2cason in pheno;jclene.lIlc. ｾＮ merlOlogy' s end tl S8 ｉｦﾷｾ irlte rpr c ta t ion thus be come s II o.utonomol1.s It 3e lf-justifying!l beca.use it carries \'Jit'- in itself its own (Scientific) source of justification, S8 quent ly ｷｾｩ｣ｨ sub- becomes the only ("e lent ifica lly) j uat ifia ble notion of a "sou..r"'c". In this vJay, phenomerJolor:;y believes that it, so to spea!-:, "cuts icself loose" from '.',11at could be called " mundane ll and mere de ;;_{iQ.Jo sour-::es or motiv8.tions 173. (a psychological need for certainty, anxiety, faith in ｮ ｑｾ ｏｬＧ ::. 0.'::> '" Ｎｬｾ ｝ﾷｾｨ U. .1, v ,Scierjcc) bv J lOr! J - - even these mlF!dane zrounded. needs, and faitL ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬ ＨｾｩＺ［｡ｌ moments of tr<:'Dscend,ental life, open be a SC.t 9Lt.if ie sroui.d, as .sc ience , it encompasses it3 own ground, anj and no (Scien if1- O,in are ( .... -::ier, .. ifically) ＮＡ｡ｲＱｬｴ｣ ｌ ｾＺｳ ､ｮｵｯｲＬｾ its ovJD it.s ＧＮｯｳｩｴｮｾ ｭｯｾ［｢ＧＨﾷＬｴｩｯｮｳ anxiety, ｲｾｏｩ ｬＬ all becol1o _.. self-enclosed Ｑ･｣ｯｾ･ｳ in need of, moreover, no ｬｯｮｾｧｲ able to ｬｯｮｾ･ｲ see or understand the sense"of, any 8xterpal j0stificati n. It a 'ＧｮｾＺＬ .. i --.........."'..........bec();1Je - - - -S- - . ｟ｾＭ ｟ＮＭ ｟Ｂ ＧＭＮ｟ Ｍ Ｎ ｬＰＳｮｨｾＮｲ of ｉＺ［Ｑｾ ＧＡＸｮ Ｒ nc'.:; • ----- (9). Since all consciousness 1.. t.aken to vJOrk GssC:!Dtially nOI'ms of H2asorJ., man is seen to be essentially ｵｮ､･ｲＺｾ Ｑ･ rat jon .1, anj philosophy, a3 ｾｨ･ of ieason ｲ･Ｍ ｳｴ｡｢ｬｩｳｨｭ･ｮｾ becomes the vo aticn through whicb man 3fid ｳ･ｬｦＭｲ･ｳｾｯｮｳｩ｢ ｬｩｴｹ Propressive-retroactive nosi J 8.8 the _ m03c ｩｮｾ LJ ｾｲｩｴ ｱｵ･Ｌ an1 its of 2eason as the £rri- life, th8t whith ｣ｯｮｳ｣ｩｯｾｳ primordial to a true ＮｾｮｩＱｌ｡ｴｳｲ･ｩｮｵＭｦｬ･ｳ (10). In the fnct of a ocicntific mordial form of all ｓＰｭｯｾ ＺｾＮｯ､･ of ｢･ｬｩＨｾｦ ｳｨｯｾｳ itself inh8i'ent in c:"nscious 17 • ' J rj '10.. pr 11HOr t ｾｲｯｳＧ , 01n 'De lDg, ｬＬｹ･ｾＩ "r Tl")el'efors, ','18 can S88 that 1.:lJ3Ser1 Ivo 1Jld say t.hSlt being i a mod111t.:y of s in-<r 18 being of ｭｾＢｲ･ｬｹ be i!-lg ( '1 ieb is the pr 1.3.12,1 mo:le). thi.s, 'vle seG ｴｾＺ｢ 313 H Ｂｬ｡ｮ［Ｎｾｲｰｴ tt'w.t I/.lhich 1.s rr\ is primal is certainty, sense, ra iona1ity, ｾｇｯｾｬ･､ｧ･Ｎ L . V18'.'1 ｾ vrn.s, .l.."t. 'J" 01 ./:.1 4' ｊｾｬ Ｎ l-rJ8 ｯｗｩｮｾ of 'V:!-(;I" is prescribed ahead of time by Pusserl's f3ith in 2e930D. "rｾＬｮ C81'til in In • • < n- 1. \.. ｾ LJ.V come ｰ｡ｳＳｾ･ +- "J'-, l' ,. h ',,# 9.S ... (.t.-ll DO surpr i ·"e. '.:Ji tb 1'e :;:'eren.; e to tte (Scientific) pre:::eedonce of llsense", l-Iusserl ｓｦＮＺｾ＾ ｴＧＳｓ that It • • • even non.:;;ense is always a mode of scnsr: and has its non-sensica1nass the sphere of l'os3ible ｴｾｊ･ 314 ｬ Ｎｴ｢ｾ ｩｳｮＱ \lJith ｲ･ｦｾＱＺ･ｮ｣･ 0 Ｑｬ ｾ｡ｴｩｯｮＸＮＭ (3cienti.fic) ljreceedenc(J of "essences" a rd. Jl _.'+'111 .J'; , 'r.e> Ｂ｡ｶｾ ....... a"1"0 ;:, J' ｟ ｬ ｮ ｡ ｲ ｾo J . t... Il • (\0 0 .... l ＮｲｾｬＧ 1 v ｾｩｴｨｩｮ ＧＫ｣ｾ ＢｌＮＧ d "Il't·" • i \...0 I J s 'i.rr- ationality' is i1:.391C a st.ructural concept \vit:lin U'e ｭ･ｾｳｹ of tile concrete il.prio1'i ll is prescri.bed Ranson ''Jｮｾ ･ｮ｣･ . ) . co. J • .l_ 315 , And agG.lli, ｐｬ ｳｾＩ･ｲｬ its sense by '--'le faith Eusserl has irl ).11 ｮto ｲｃＢｏｃｾ .... \., ..... _ .... l" \-1 1'2. C t, poss i bi U. t.y pI' et,;sec1 s ac tna.l i ty? sense precee1s nonsens8, Peine ｮＱJ..-'Ｂｃ＾ＨＧｻＮＩｏＨｾ 1- ....... '-" ............. ｴＭｪｮ ｾｬＩｃ ｩＧＢｬＺＭｲ ...,I ..., ..,I.... C), Qp"'son .;. \. __ ':..l. • ... preceeds faith. For phecomello1ogy, the latter in each case is mel'e1y a moda it 1 of t, e former and C:-Ifl be (i.e., .scj,entifically) l:nderstood ｯｮｾｹＧ ll 1l+"'l,lv \.'.i.. ,{ J- J as SUCh. 175. (ll)c Jince all conscious life is pro;ressiVely-retroactively posited as worting lo3er the Gorms of Reason, and, e""j'V J ., • v C . oJ hJ"prce ｏ 1ﾻＨＮﾷＧｾ to ｾＬＧ ':'.-,i ;J ｾ Ｎｾ Ｐ ｮ ｲ ｾｾ ･ Ｑ Ｂ ｾ Ｇ ｉ ｊ Ｑ ｃ __ Jv •• Ｚｾ e 1 C'n'lent of .- e-nt"f'r, . _L '. 1. __ a ox''''' ,.. 1- 1 __ｩＨＬｾｴＧｩｯ｜ ｾ d '.'. iCLlSD8 ｾＬｳ ｣ＨＩｮｾＬ｣ is 1., of consciousness is ou'·.,ida of th2 scope of trar:. cendental Ｎｾ｟Ｇ｟ｾ｟ .•_ _ ... lifo .• SDOeX'EJ of cc,nscious ｾＮ｟ ｾ U:s C"·'n ••• 'in _ .• ｾ｟ｵ Ｚｲｯｩｴ｡ ｾ ｬＩＬｉｾＧ ｮｩＭﾷｦｬ･ｳ . •_ _. Therefore, in an obvj.ous reference to Husscrl says that ｜ｾ ._ ｲｾ ｴｩｮ i tl in tbe scope of \1is trarJs..:.:endc:ntal pbenomeno lot'S; ｾ ｾ .. ｳｲｵ｣ｾＨｯ of ｟ｃｬ ［ＮｩＢＧｬﾣＡｄｊｾﾧｴ Ｎ ｊＺ｡｣ ｴｵ｡ｬﾭ fe.te., of the p<?3sibility of a ｾｩｬ･ｱｦﾧＮｊＺＱｽＲｭﾣｲｌＢ der:landec' as 'meaningful 'r in a particular case -- among them, therefore, "he pr blom of the :t mean ｩｮ｛ｾＧｬ of' il is tory ｾ Ｎ Hod all the further and stj11 higher problems. fi8SS-:..-Q.S' ､ＨＡ｡ｴ Ａｾ｟ＲＮ ｦ ｾｌｧ ｬ＿ＡＮｧｲＩｊ ｌｨｾＮｬＬ 317 In the face of (12). as Seien e, even death is Firk provides us with a final ccnslmmation of ｅｵｾ｡ｮ Busserl's ｰｨ･ｮｯｾ･ｮｯｬ ｧｹ ｳ･ｬｦＭｩｾｴ･ｲｰ ･ｴｑ ｩ｣ｮｾ ,L Is man therefore absolute? ｉｾｯｴ alL But nei tar is tb9- absol-te a "transccndent" ｲＢＧｾ｡ｬｴ y beyond ｩｾｬＧｮ and no ADcoE1pa ·'si.ng him. :3epSlI'a .. ing and ｾｬｩｳｴ ｮＮｾｵＳＱ Ｍ 176. iog them is as false as their ､ｩｲ･ｾｴ equation. In tltI'ans_endent ll .relDt.ion bet":!een mor: ｬｾｮ｡ trw ＬＱ｣［ｲｬｯＺｧＭｬｾｲｏｊＧ｜ I:H: ;J'ust ｾﾷ ｉｏｓｩｴＮ a Htransce dental" relaticn which d00S not ｯｾ･ｲｬ｣ｯｫ man's worl'ly fir,itude, frailty and impotence, bu.!: ·"Jhich CO[f1r ' r,vOl!.::JI.ll.ll.C .. .... t- ":1... GLUn.Lng, . CJ': 1-hol'l )b,T Ｌ｟Ｎｯｬ ･ＺＮｩ｣ｾｰ 1. t a<: ｾ ... a \. ｃｾ .; taking it back into the ｩｮｾｩｮ ｴ･ essence of spirit. place of P I l .., 'le 3. ｾＮｊ .! ｾ J_ . 318 'Thr oughou t, nus se r 1 mEt :trIta ins tlv) fa i th the t it i b1c ,.I -"'i. n an 8. 8 t (\ f' seLf - f ul f' i.ll_m,:.:.:.,ｬＮＺ［｣ＡｮＭｬＮｾＺ｡ｴ［ＮＡｲＺ･ • for man to "attain ll ｾ ｴｨｾＬ na t ure as transcendent;}l j. s Ｎﾷｾｴ _3 elf'- __ ｾＩｯｓＭ de rot ti11. , Absol 'te and rea11z.0 his Iltrue" ｳｵ［ｾＬｪ ec 1 v:L ty, for ｾＢＯｨ ic h 111.1>1an finitude and 1 umand limitatio! s are mere constituted mean- \vish nm", to speak of .:;everal tJ-.in;s 1,0;0 of EllS ser 1 1 s fa ith in Reason. "e Vii sh ,hat to speak of bOH Busserl ' s faith in Heason t1trar-scenc1stl the scope of his phenomenology as a philosophy of Immanenr::o. also to ;; Reason ,0\,1 1.{e ':lis11 bo'.'; t,;.' s faith proyes to be a Ilbasis ll for and therefore underminas Reason's pretence to a11- pervasive self-enclosure and self-justification. We wish also to speak uf the need for Science and t e need for certainty as the prime llmoti'/atior: l: for the performance of the phefJomen log i.C8 1 rcduc t ion and lIml the me Vlod ieal 177c doubt evident in U',e reduction is carried out by _!usserl for the sake of the establishment of certainty and the elimination of doubt. ｾ･ Russerl himself \lIas untr hOI'; ｯｮｾ･ Ie ｉｬｵｴＢｬ｣ｲｩｴ ｾ｡ｬｴ r-eduction by hi.s of Science Wish therefore, to speak of to the insights of the re-instigation 0.' the soal the reduction had been perforNed. Russerl's faith in Reo.son ",!as the sale ｰｲ･Ｍｰｨ･ｲ［ｯｭＸｲｬｯ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ ｭｯｴＺｌｾ vation which he did not, and 1:'3 seems c()uld not, allo\1J the reiuction to ･ｦｾ･｣ｴＮ We wish, therefore, to speak of how or whether nusserl's method (t.8 reduction) can be "sepa.rated" froE1 his irotivation (trw need for Scienc:e S\1.Crl that the ()lcU-JOel escapes the crit'cj.sms leveled ae.J.inst the moti\7CJ.tion. Fir.all)', vIe Ylish to speak of h01..J Eusserl's basing of the Scientific project on'his unvoiced faith in Reason shows trrnsc8ldental phenomenology to be a fO.lffi of ｴｲＸｮｾ ､･ｮｴｃｬ ｾＮＱＲｳｊｃｾＱＰｬｯ［ｾＮ (I "J18h to speal\: 0-,- m'.r.ty thin.::;s at thi. s point U1 my study of Russerl's pherJomenology, yet, becanse of n:y pl'esent. ambi.valent attitude tm,'ar"Js 't!usserl's project, I feal i.ncapable of doing so. In attempti.ng to explain this ambivalance, I hope that the reader stall see more clearly tl e seductive nature of Busserl!s phenomenology and perhaps gair. s orre insight into the possibility of escapin,; the compelling ci1'c 1i.larity Plat E13serl sets up). In our first three chapters, w_ spoke of the menology, y baing solidly based upon his faith in rleason, pre<-cribcd the nature possibl.ity and necessity of such ＧＮｾｯ ｲ ｯｶ･ｲ qUfJstioninr;. ｾ valance) Pusse.rlls (and trlis is the source of ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹ ｡ｭｬＩ ｾ is such that it will not allow the ques -ions we wish to pose in this our vＨ Ｂ ｬ ｾ ａ Ｇ ﾷ ｲ ｦ ｪ Ｇ Ｚ ｾ . 1 _;.;/[\ F(;UP _ _\ , to even be formulated in such a way as GO pose any oreal threat". We have seen that in the face of Husserlian ｔｒａｾｓ ｅｾＭｄＳｾｃｅ absurd. '-1.'0 is nrecj·sely .L . - .. speak of " somcthtnr; oU.t3idc" of thE! field of Immanence demands that our sp0aking be ｰｨｇｮｯｭｳｮｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ randed It is 11e1's that 'Ide z,ain a clue to the ｮＨＧＩｪＮＲﾧ Ｌ＿ｮｳｾｦ＾ seductiveness of It" • • ｅｵｾｳ･ｲｬＧｳ p:cojGct. F'ol' vie see that even everJ nonsense is all-Jays a mode of sense and. ;as its non-sensicalne3s -lit.·,in toe sphere; of possible insight." 319 In allowing Eusserl to brand. our' questions nonsense Ｈ｜ ＱｾＧ ｩ｣ｨ ｳｾ ･ｩＡｬｓ q\lite reasonalbe to do!) '1:Je re "c1l'mvn back into the fold". To tall{ 0.1.' HUE;serl's rigor_us Science as bei.ng based npon bis fa.ith in neason, a fai'h vJhich itself e.scapes Ｇｾｌ t 3c:ien,.e anj. tl'anscp-nds it is for Husserl. to .usserl seductively embarasses such attc:-npts at undermining 179. the possibility of Science, to the extent that he tells us that \>le arc merely doing \'Ibat he i.s doing, but not as \'1811, not qUitfl as honestly and resronsibly. ｱｵｩｴＨｾ He tells us th'2lt: • ｾ ｾｷｨ｡ｴ 0 'he ral tonality of that ｩｲ ｡ｴｩｯｮｾｬｩｳｭ which is so ｮｾｵ｣ｨ vaunt-ee an":; expected of us? Does it not ｨ｡ｶｾ to convince us, if we are expected to listen to it with rational cnnsiderations and reasons? finally rather a narrowHorse th::w that of the old ratinalism? Is it not rat ar the rationality of Itl c zy reascrJ ll h'hich eV2(1(>s the ｳｴｲｬ ［ｾｬ･ to clarify t, e ｾｬ t ima te data. • -:-a-nd ･［ｲＧｾ ｳＱＸｯｾ and d ｩＮｬＺ･｣ｴｯｮｾＩ which they alone can rationally anu truthfully preIs its irration31ity minded 81J( bad ｲ｡Ｇｾｩｯｮ｡ｬｩｴｹＬ ｾｯｴ serite? 320 . '''' '0> T '\.'1: ＢＧｰｮｾｴｬ .::>, '., o. ,-, Ｂ ｬＧｾＱＮ ｊｾ ct:::, ｾＬ . ,.J L, L'uc,c'e""] :. .:> ':J _ ., ｾ ｮ" ｊ . ｟ｾＬ n·!l'st. If q_'.i.vp. _ _ ｲｾｅｊ｡｣ＺｯｬＱｓＢ _ _ _ 1"'.01' y he is "inc(J!'Tect", one must limo. -e sense" cut of' \'ihat has BUSSEll.'l. ｯｶ･ｲｬＮｯ ｬｾ･､ tn order co convine'3 the rea.der of' the 'tvalidity" of the questions raised. And, finally, one must hold that what one says in answer to this question . samaho\'! is lttrua l1 • "Giving reasons ft , "correctnessll ｾ "validity" , lItruth": it ｾ･ ｓＸＨｾｭｓ th8.t in speakiJ.lg against Husserl, somehow speak for him. To allow Husserl to brand what we say as do!) ｜ＧｊｲＭｾ ｩｲ ｡ｾｪｯｲＺ｡ｬｩｳｭ (VJliich agnin is quite reasona be to are as;a.in t1dra\ n in" anc This situation ｮｾｲｇｬｹ It .onsmned". voices once again the authorls ambivalent feeling tOwards Husserl. It shows tho. t the s i tUB. t ion pre serJt. in the <1\18;:': t ion of Transcendence 180. Jransfol'nl,,!tio.fJ of That is, we, need ｱｬｊＮＢｳｴＮｩ ｯｮｩｲＨｾＮ nOl<} not m0rely speak of difforent things, but speak differently, and perhaps J.n ends the d 1ali ties ｴｲ｡ｮｳｾ mar:ner v.lhich 0. (rationcilism and irrationalism. sense and nonsense) I which himself '£'!2..n set up, ｅｵｳｾ･ｲｬＮ encompa. ｾｊｬ Ｑ define, and .9_@ ,sG Is it possible to escape the circularity which Eusserl 1 s faith in R("ason sets l.p? .7or this to be possi ble, \·iha t is deman:I(:d of l15 is not a mere trans it ion tc irratioD31ism G Tbi c in fact is not an escape at all. Irrationalism stands in" too close a proximity to Hus3erl 1 s ｰｲｯｪｾ｣ｴＬ being defined by it as its oppo'ite (and there- fore as a mere modality), and therefore it is constantly undu.' the threat of. be ｩｮｾ "drR"I'iD j.n ll by 8. phenorr-enology directed towards, as Husseri readily admits, to 321 coming a 1.1 rr:!sistance ar,d stupiditylt It • • • over- Something more is required, a new way of thinking6 Perhaps if this is fulfilled, one need not speak against ､ｯｧｭ｡ｾｩ｣｡ｬ ｹ se:cl Reason) or dogmatically for him (by the ｷｾＰＱ･ｳ｡Ｑ･ accep- tance of the definitivenncs0 of Reason). Perhaps then this ne,,) vJay of thinking v.li11 d.en:and or,ly ｾ r"j ct Ｎｊ｟ｾ e'"i m"1' '" ," t.. _" 1" 0".11 0 1.C' Pus' _1 :":) e ::.r Jｾ the re-instigation of ｾｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｇｯｬ ｧｹ I S P J.. \'1 0 ｾ )' C. t:;; c -t .. •• (3 iimit9.ttilll and not Perhaps it ｾｩｬ allow in a new light and a Dew serse. ｷｩｾｨ I n .::> 'Ve'S ･ｬ｢ｩｳｾＢ［ｯｰ in:: r:J 0 J-v l' 1oJ P.. . \) c ."j (") t' ] _ ....... by ｢･ｬｩ｣ｶｩｦＱｾ J1...1 "(I a ,- f 1,- +- l V. 0 t.... lJ V 1,.j.... ＮＧｾ f . n (<)l l'1 C .J -.' (; (.l......J ') n ,. . It in the ｾＺＬｯｳ Ｎｩ ｢ ｬｩｴｹ of £l'( pnd- \.,1it.1. full. self-jll;;t.ii'i.,"aU.on? I;' it not ｦ｜･ ｾｯｮ precisely a belief in the s Ａｾｲ､Ｎｴｨ of escape Yhich ｾｯ ｳｩ｢ ｬｩｴｹ defines Ell.S;30rl 38 :2903 the circle (or so it 398ms) by establishing ｦｴｾＲＮｓＰｮ 8S l in the pm-lex: of i.tf;c:::..iOn'? fJl.1.sset'l sel.f •. ,zrr.;.ufJ:1jr.g. seems) by ｡ｴ ･ｭｰｴｩｾ･ ｲｾｵＲ -.lscape the circle (or so it to show that it is true that ve f.r t' 1,'Ie J the to tl0 circls ｷｾＱ｣ｨ ｡ｴ ｾｭｰｴ ｡ｾＹ ｒｾ｡ｳｯｮ is ｾｯｴ self- the circle an3 cannot escape it, to GS2apO, we are drayn back in we had never left. L ST OF ｓｎｏｉｔａ ｖｾｒｂ ａ The foll.ovl:Lng abbrov:Lations shall be util:lzed in the lotes to follo\'!, "lith pagin 'lions ind:icn edG Tb8 full cl tations for' the "lorks listed belc'YJ Will be fourld in our BIBLIOGRAPHY. lR EH§ ｙｬｾｏｓｯｬｩｨｐＢ ｾ｡ ｳｵｯｲ ｾｩｒ Scierce'o 1. "Husserl f S ｴＮｾ Inagural LectUJ:E: Briesgau (1917)lt4I ･Ｇｬｵ｢ＮｩｾＨﾷｌＺｆ ｾｪ 11 Edmund Husserl: A Let.ter to Al'nold l"letzgor lt " nS y l1a.bus of a COt1.x'se of 1\'0111' Leetu.:c'8s on 'Phenomenological Method and Phenomenolocical Philosophy' (1922) H e ｉｾｋ｡ｮｴ and the Idea of Tra.nscendental Philo·sophy" " eM nPhenomenology and ａｮｴｬＱｾｯｰ ｬｯｧｹＢ Tht3 Cr:sls .. _of _ EU1.'ODean ______ Ｎ ｾ ｟ Ｎ Ｎ Ｎ ｟ ｟ Ｎ ａ ｟ ｾ ｾ ｾ .. SC:leflCEJS., ...,..... . .,__ .. ｾ _no;.- .... Ot.b.e.r.§. ITn Eugen Fink, "What Does the Phenomenology of R1mund Husserl \AJ:lnt to Acc:omplish? Ｈｾｃｨ｣ Phenomenological Idaa of ｌ｡ｹｩｮｧｾａｲｾ Gl'ound)n l> Eugen Fin!.;:? t<Tbe Phenomen( logical ｐｨｩｬｯｾ sophy of Edmund Russerl and ContempOl"1ry ｃｲｩＮｴｩ｣ ｳｭｈｾ Hartin Heideeger, 1I1}.'ho End of Philosopby and tho Task of ｔｨｩｮｫｩｮｧＢｾ Mauri.co Hej:1AC1.u-Ponty, "P1.'o.facell to hj.s ｐｴｾｭｑＮｴＩ ｑＮＱ ＧｸｾｲＴＮＬ ｪＺｬ ｱＮｬ ｩＺｴｯ Jl. Y1 Jean-Paul Bartra, "Intentionality: A Flmdamental Idea in Husserl' s Phenomenologytt Paul nicoueI', ItPhenomenologyll .. 0 NOTES INTHODUCTI0t1 3 ｰＮｭｾＨｽ｣Ｌ ppc 6. \'Je cSJ:''cainly agr e Htth F:' n k vlhen he SUppol'ts th1s statement by saylng that tb obscl1rlty of tho centr21 and authentic weaning of phenomenology 1s due to its radically nnatural character c He says that "The appropriation of its true meaning cannot at all come about within the horizon of our natural deportment of knowledge,," Ｈｉｬ＿ｴｾ｡Ｌ ppo 6) .. He nlso poj,nt out tflat II Access to phs.1': omenoloO''I[ demands a radical rcvers<: 1 of Oilr' total ｭＺｩＸｴ･ｮＨｾｇ " ... " (llUd", pp .. 6). t</e do not Jjsh to argue ,,,ith these comments" HOv1ever, \\18 ,.! ｨｾｦｩ to stress that this ･ｮｩｦｾｭ｡ｴＱＮ｣ character of Hu sseI' 11':;'11 phe' omeno .. ｹｾｯ is not one that can be OV8rClmso That is, 1 e feel that the en1gmat5c character ,f ｰ｢ｇＺｮｯ ＱｅＧｄｯｬＨＩｾＷ ts >-10 G S tmply a ll'odtwt ot an U incorr'f:!(;t att:tw:io tV to'\·J.!'Jrds phenomenology vJhich ma.y lead to mi t0 presentations of its &uthent'c meaning (although this most certainly an! most commonly does occur). Rather, it is phenomenology itself which is ir e sence ･ｮｩｧｭｾｴｩ｣Ｎ This arises because of the infinite and ever-receeding sou'ces of insight gained through the phenomenological ｲ･ｯＮｵ｣ｴｩｯｮｾ cf ｣ｧＮﾧｾＬ pp .. 39U.· o \.,)tj ｟ﾷｾｾＢＢＢＢ｟ﾷＧ _ _" '_ _ ﾷ｟ｾＢ ＢＧＭ ｬＢＧ｟ＧﾷＭ ＢＧｾ C m, 0 appencHx to hIs Gl'jill ot.Jt:u,±:Qf1Jll1.tl entit ad llrrhe Life-\vol'ld and the o.rld of Sci-eoca" 4 Hu.sser 1, in an ｩｬＮ ･ ﾣｊＡ ｦｾＲ｣ｓ aslrs: Can ore not turn to the ｬｩｦ･ｾｷｯｲｬ､Ｌ the wor d of ivb1.ch we are all conscious in life as thEJ vJorld of .s all, wi tbout in any \>lay ｾ ｮｩｫ｡ｭ it into a subject of universal investigations, bei.ng ahvays glVt1n over, rather, t our everyday momentary ｩｮﾷｾ dividual or universal vocational ends and interests-can one not surrey it universElly in a cba gad attitude, and can one not seek to get to know it, as wha t it :l.s and hOH i.t is 1n its o"m rno bill ty and ｲ･ｊＮ｡ｴｊＮｶｩｴｹｾ make it the subject matter of univer.sal sc.i.ence, but one "Ihieh tas by no means thG goal of universal theory in the sense in which this was sought by historical philosop1y and the sc:1.ences? ( Ｌ ｾ "''''c' ppc 38-:».) .. If phenomena. ogy as a rigorous Science of Being is to be possible at all, Husserl realized that the answer to this must be affirmative. Husserl realized, by the time of the Crhif. tLat it is precisely the ｉＺＮｾｊ［ｾＡ｣ｬｴ which serves as the "foundation" for all theory and for all natural c i('3DCes. In a ttemptin3 to t! gro mel. II the se ience s 9 if the ｌ･ｊＩｇｰｾｬ ｊＢｾ cannot ｢ｾ made subject to a univer.:>al Science and C&nrlot be open to scientific explicatioD 9 Husserl's project would be doomed to failure. This demanded of Husserl that he hold that a Science of the life-world is possible& Th 5, AS we shall see, further demands that the Science of ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹＬ unlike natural science, not be founded upon the 1..0 ＮｉＺｾｕ｜ｓｄ｢ t. A IIlethod '\'111 5.011 puts out of play the tendency to base onets sclence on t1e ＮＱＦ ｧ･ｮｳｾ lli.!. is i. ardor" It ｩｾＺ［ dtf'fi.cul t to lmagtDe how Buss )."1 vJOnld have continued his pbenomenoloslc 1 p.. . . 0jec)· after the Q,rJ,?\§. had he lived. Would he have remained true to his lifelong goal of Science or would he have allowed the ｩｮｳｩｾｨｴｳ that emer,ge in tho ｃｲＮｊ［ ｾ ｩ to carry his :Lnvestteatlon'" beyond this r,oal in to t.he realm of ＮｑＲｲＮｩｾｊ･ｄｴ ＢＱｩ ｌｮ｢･ ｯＬｾ m.Gl19];9g:i:? It 18 OUX' conviet ion .,ha t he \4oulcl not do so 0 5 An extensi n of this notion of htstory and the problems it, po"es for tr·an.:>cendental phenomenology L. dealt "J: th In a c leal' and. compe 11 i.ne mann "r by David C8.rr :Ln his book eClti tled ｊ ｪ Ｑ ･ ｾ Ｎ ﾣ ｗ ｯ ｾ Ｒ Ｎ ｌ ｾ Ｎ ｩ ｨ ﾧ ＮｒｬＺｑＮ ｬｾｦＡＮｌｑＬ ｊｬｌｳｴＹｊＺｘＮ 6 af" CHAP'fEEt FOUR belm.] .. Evidence for thl.s . endoncy in Husserl is clearly indicated in th0 passage c'ted above in note 4" 7 Russeri reveals, in a letter to Arnold Metzger (1917) that his faith in Science ･ｸｴｾｮ､･ back as far as 1882, definito' y before his discovery of the phenomenological ｲ･､ｵ ｴｩｯｮｾ ei'" note See also ｉ､ｩｴＮＱ ｾｯＬ pp" 5l.+-560 8 cf& Our ｅｾａｆｅｒｐ Q ｾ als note 2690 10 Cl-!., pp. 2 It j.s of tnt-crest to compare this ｰ｡ｳ ＲＮｲｾ･ from Husser] t s ﾣｾｱｦＮ｟ｴｊＱｃ＿ｩｳｬｽ ....ｍＮＹｌＺＢＡＮｦｴ ＺＰＮｾＱ vl:Lth n. passCJ.[lE} fl'om bis ar tj_c 1e nphi Loso phy as Higoro\ls Sc: iencG \I c. Ther e in he states: Profundity .i.s a mark of the chaos that f:'enuino sceince wants to transform Lnto a cosmos, i.ltO a simple, completely clear, lucid order. Genuine sc'8nce, S0 £'c'u' as 1ts real !locirine extends, ImO'. s DO profunditYG (PR>?_, pp" 1 1+4) 0 But then Husserl goes on to ｳ｡ｹｾＮ Profundi t;r is an affa i1" of' w:Lsdoru ｾ cone e ptual distinetness and cLu j.ty (Pli§.o, PPo ＱｾﾷＴＩ j s an atfair of r:igol'ous ·h·,or 0 0 In the ｑｬｾＩＺﾷｴ･ｾｩｬＮＺｨﾣｬｴｌＱＺｾｌ＼ｴＮｾｕ｟ ｑＡＮｬＺ｟ｾ ｜ｾ EJ heal' that vI isdom is the goal of phLLosophy, ｜ﾥｬＱ･ＮｴＧｾｈｩＮｳ nOVJ, 1n nphilosophy as Rigorous Science!! IN tsdom is _G.2.ntX:ls·;·,t1(1 to b'IIe philosophy as science" Her e 5.n, Eus ·r.H'· 18 eontl'asi: ing the H\'J isdom" of !i§J ｴｃｩｊＮｳ＼ｬ｢｟ＧｾｌｮＹ pl1il sophy ＨｐｆｾＲｑ ｾ ｰｾ 133) to the qllGc;t fOl' Science v!b:Lch SGsks, not wisdom, but rigorous Scientific ｫｮｯｷｬｇ､ｧ･ｾ C 140.... 7 " ppa 4- 6 and 1)1)\u., ｰｾ See a.lso our CHAP'I'EJ.1. FOUR belm}, \vhere ve discuss hovi the .. , 'I'1f 11 ." t> I ., .j:ip , .. 2Ｍｊｾ｟ Q 9 , ('M '.Ｎｮﾷｬｾ '} quest for a ri?orous Science of Being in fact defines and del:im:lts tho scope of that "Ih 5.ch '\. i 11 count as a II penlline!f beg:Lnning" If rad:lcally ｳ･ｬｦｾｃｬＧ i tical philosophy is dedicated tovJl.lrd flnd:i.ng ·the II Beginnin£(' ollt 1.n fact uncritica 1y deDines ahea. of time that which Wi. 1 count as such a Ii beg i..nning it , it 10s8 s j.ts claim to rad ica1.i ty. ＢＮﾧｾｆｐ 13 ') pp" ＷＲＭＳｾ ｉ｢ｾｩＢＬ 14 15 1. ｾ 16 pp pp. 280 ＬＮｾｬｐ 17, __I '" 73& pp. 11-12. p .p • ')8 " ')'7 c_ ( •• '- J.8 For I{usserl, "le could have said IIphj.losophyH instDad of Hphenomenolor.;y"" Husst:rl firmly believe' that his phenomen- oloGY \-Jas the ｣ｾｯｮｳｵｭｕＱ｡ｴｩｯｮ of the Ideal of ｰｨｩｬｯｳ ｰｨｾ itself ｾ Tberef the ｲ･ｾ of phenomenology is said to be the ｾｯ｡ｬ goal of ph'losophy -- its inherent talos -- which had b0cn "forgotton H in the uatu:ca1ism and objecttvtsm of the ninetGcnth-centuryo The issues rRisad by this equation of pheljOmenolo2Y \·1 ith ｾＩ｢ ilosophy are so ｪｊｲｕｮＸ ｾＳ･ that He are unable to do them justiee in the prBSelyt c ntexte 19 1., pp. eli., Meditation One. cf. also ＲＷｾ 20 1., PPo 19" 21 This perhaps accounts for an annoying tendency that some p11Gnomena:Logist hays \-Jhen attemptj.ng to Gxplain phenomenology to the as yet il uninLti1.ted tl " Oftcm a "phenomenal gj.st li "lil1 elaim t.hat ouefs oucstions alB asked simply because one 1"1asn f t Helone the -reduction" yot; and too often this is proposed as an answer '0 the initial ｱｵ･ｳｴｩｯｮｾ It is certain that Busserl would be appalled by such 1gexclusivi.·,yH as is evi<i.ent by ｨｾ s infinj.. te patience and constant formulation and re-forruulation of introductions to his phenooanoLogy. _- , 22 ..eNe Ｇｽｾ c;..-I Ｎ［ ＮＬＲ ｜ｾＮ11 ｬＬ . 7" np ｾ pp" 8 () 1 Cl.<> p ｾ ＾ＺＧｾＱ ｔｦｰａｈＢＨ,-, ｾ '<'O-LTD :,[\ 1 Ln, b e. 1 th II'] 1 "IV 18l'e . G 1'e 1.al/ance of this passa.ge is dtscussed. 25 This is why Busserl sa.ys with reference to Kant, that "The ultimata presuppositions of the possibility and ac uuIity of 0 bj !:JC ti va kno\Jledge cannot be 0 bj Gct ｩｖｅｬ ｾｲ kno'wa b1e" 0 (0W8 \ ｾＮ｟ Q' D"O 0 J• .L Ｉ ｾ ｏ ./ Ｎｲｾ｣ :; 9 . e Ｎ［ｾ0WQ 9 9 I)D Q .l; 93 97 • ..- (I 26 I.? pp .. 11. 27 Il:.Jd .. ｾ 28 ｓｾｍ＼Ｂ pp" 27 pp. 51" 29 Footnote to 31 HeQ., f> ｊ｢ｩｾＮＬ ｰｾ 27e ppc 101. 32 cf" our IrTB.ODUCT'rON and our CHAPTER 33 As Huss Lectures u ':, ｾｩ ｕｏｆ 1'1 says in his 1t8yl1abus of a Course of Four There cannot be independent sciences side by side and as ｯｮＨｾ amongst them ph 11080p1]y, but only a sole universal SCid)Ce on a single ribsolutfJ f'oundatj.on" ＨﾧｙｊＱＮｮ｢ｵｾＶＧ pp" 23) cf note and. note ＳｾＧ beloH" 34 El.1gen Fink sets ph\?Domenolo;:;y 1n relation to the ltmundene .c'cj.8J.1C0::;11 in the _0110\-/ inp; manner ｾ 8inc8 ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯ｝Ｎ｣ｊｾｙＬ tbl'Ollgh kno\11ed::e of th(-? ＺｊＨＭｲＮｑｌｾ roal izes a k.no·u ine \oJhich in ｨＨｩＮｇ ＺｪＹｾ ｟ ｴ Ｎｑ ｌＧ｢ｽｩＮ ｚｬｾＳｴ｟Ｎ ｬｩ prillc:tpl' tl'anscends all forms of ｭｵｲｾ､ＸＮｮ･ Lnouleo.g8 " ｾ ｯｾ it dwelops a!1ii.! concept of 'cienceb Nhile th(3 tradi.tionD.l !tnniv {·:;r sal It conGspt of sc ience is asicaJ.ly relatod to tt 1,.J01'. d-immanent ｫｮｯ｜Ｇｊｬ･､ｾ ｴｏＬ phenomenology, so to ＨＧｰ･｡ｫｾＮ Hex ,ends" the con ,ept of sc ienC(3 by developing " knm,) in[; \vhich ts vlOr ｬ､ﾷｾ transcendent" ＨｊＺｉｄＮｳ｡ｾＧ ppo 98) Pl ElJ.l0menology thc.>reby ､Ｚｌｳｴｮｧｬｉｩ｢ｾ Itself from the ｭｵｮ＼ｾ da.ne scJ.ences and remains j nd6pend 0nt of ｴｬｶｾｭＢ Ye t, since it 1s cU.r9c-red ｴｭＧｊ｡ｲ､ｾ llgrounding n the mundane sci-ences, it is inclusive of worldly science and ･ｸｰ･ｲｩＸｮｊ･ｾ Fink Q COl t iDlW S : Pbenoffisnological ｾｮｯｷｬ･､ｧ･ of origins does not taLe its ｰｬｾ｣･ text to the mlnd.ane sciences q thereby fallile.; ·under a (:ommon t1higher coneept ll of' ftscience in ge.nel'a1.. H \1/ lJ:h them, bu. is tn a defInito sense llrJ;.Q£. ,:k9. alJ Hor Id ly knmv ledgo. • ".. e <> the r ieOl'ous Se lence of phenomenology II gl'ounds II all \,wY'ldly sc18nce in a radical sense '.v hich cannot be ViGil/cd in terms of the mundane ｲ･ｬ｡ｴｩｯｮｳｾｰ［Ｓ of establishing one science by means cf another. tHeC., ppe 98)" An objection could be raised at this point however" If the thematic sphere of all possible kn·1;,'le6.<:;e ·.8 ｪｾ｢Ｎｌｗ｟ｑＮｔ ｊ､ｾ (cf. I., PPo 51), how can one establish a ｾｯｲｬ､Ｍｴ｡ｮｳ｣･ ｾｩＹＮ［Ｌｮﾣｑ "\II t tboat enter i.ng into the realm of" unsu stant. toted sp0culatlon? \:113 see til t P Jenomenology cannot maint,:"l.5.n its claim to a science (and the'sfore its claim to ｫｮｯｷｬ･､ｾＸＩ unless i.t ｣｡ｩＱＭ ｾＺ Ｇ［ｯ EJstablisb a lTls.1.!2.9c1 \vhe:cety kno1JTedge--of the 'vJOrld 1 i terms of it.s origin can be bad" In extending the not:Lon of sci.ence, it at once must extend the scope of possible kn Ｎ･ｾ､ｬｷ Fink asks: Hm<J can its questioning meaningfully transcend the <l can it give an answer to the concern origin, this traditional theme of theol gy and ｳｰ･｣Ｚｵｬ｡ｴｩｯｮｾ in terms of a theoretical know-edge? In radical opposition to all metaphysics of faitl and speculation, phenomenology develops a ｭＸｩＺｊｬｑＮ｣ｦ｟ｋｾＦ Vin...& ·vl!: ich leads to the or iE; n of the world itself and makes it the thematic object of a possible ｫｮｯｷｬ･､ｾ • This method and way of knowing is tbe lI phenomenological I'eduction!? ｾ ＨｦＱ｣ＮＺＧｾ , pp .. world and for a ｮｯｧｩｶｾ .. ｯＩＹ ｾＸ " Q ｨｯｾ Hence, ]e can see that the essentlally n8W and radical na tnre 0'" phenomenolor;y as a if-orous Sc ience of Be ing car"not be fyl_t,::: grasped as a possibIlity Lwtil the met.od vlb ich ｾＧ｛ｴ ＿ bl ＺｾｓｬＱａ ｾＭＧＺ ｬｴＮＰＭ Ｑ＿ｯＧ Ｎﾧ ｩＡＲｊＮＺ ｬｾ ｴＮ ｙ (the phe nOHl8 no lot:; ical red.uction) J.s int:roduc'::3d and undel'stood. ｏｮ｣ｬｾ ｡ＧＭｾ｡ｩｮＬ 'V]e are facecl \>Ji.th the dU'flclJ .t:Les of underst8.ndi.nf, phenomenfl olCJb,nT "from tho outsido • cf. notes a.nd cf. also OU_ CHAPTE. FOUR. vlherein \,]e come to tbe conclusion that the phenomenologlcal l'pductiotl as it is charac tel" ized by Eus se:r 1 doe S !J?t ｾＤ｟ｴＮＲ ＿ｬＬＮｾｓｬＺ ＷＮｴＧＺＬｩｾ｟ｑＲｳ ｊ ..!2i1. tt:L:, but l'a thl31' Qte ＿ｊ､ＮｐＲｑｾ｟ｴｨｬ s ..p.o §'9_1J?J.l ]J:..Ｎｾｙ '/l 0 ./ 3 5 ,!u 0 t Gel. :Ln. Pal ).1 H:L C 0 lJ 81', ｾＱ ｾＮｳ e r .lL__AJL.l.n.Rl.Li.i...:S.,..2..ｾＱＮｩｴＺｌ Ph8i1omenoloa:y., Ｈｅｶ｡ｮＮｾｴｯｮＺ 1":orth\vestern Ulliversity ＱＹｾＩ ｖｐＺＳＰｾ ｾ I 36 Quoted in Herbert Spieeelberg, 1..11e ､＿ｾＮｌＺ･ｑＱＮｬｊﾧｾ ＹＲＱＧｨｐ｟ (The JiB,gUe ｾ Hi3.rtinus Ihjhoff ｾ 19'71). vol. 1. LOV8nlent ... ｰ ＺｾＭ ｲｦ ［Ｍ ｉｾＧ ｐｬＧｅ ｓ ｾ / I I 37 ＿ｑｾｬｩｴＮ･ｉ pp" 51.1-" These three passag'3s become extremely reiGvant -vlhen ､｡･Ｇｬｾｏｲ in light 0 .. our CHAPTEH. F0Ui"{. 38 The j.nclusion of tbe \·wrd uneecl u here is s absolutely decisive as we shall see be ow in our CTIAPTER FOUR. We agree, in Gpite of tho arguements presented in that chapter, trlat fl'l'l1e need for a rigorous c'c iE'nce and full clarity, reflec ed in Husserl's pe sona1 nedd and task, goes deeper than tni _II" (pp" 2 1}) tIle feel tbat Husserl is merely volcing, in arl honest and flJlly e:Tplicit manner, a need and faith inherent in pJ ilosophy itself as 1:ati9paliSfQ. 39 For an extremely clear presentation of the various f rms that th"s historical scepticism can take, cf. PPR" ｾ pp., 2)+6-252" He1.' 8in, Carr deals '\\lith and does full justice to the type of ｣ｩｲ｣ｾｬ｡ｲｩｴｹ which arises from the arguemsnts of ｨｩｳｴｯｲｩｾ｡ｬ scepticisffie Historical factual reflection tells us that philosophical systems have raJ.led to stand tllG "test of time ff • There are, however, tvlO possible extonsions of this ｲ･ｶ｡ｬ ｴｩｯｮｾ One is that we could be lead to say that the pres.nt attempt at philosophizing must be ＱＦＮｊＡ ｐＢｾＺ Ｎ ･Ｌ ｜［ ｩ Ct!1d ＱｲＩＮｴｮｩｾ･､Ｎ by such knQi.<:ledge., T'he other is tbClt the present attempt at philosOTjhizing is j.ntellectually ﾣｩＮ ｧ｢ｑﾷ Ｎ ｾ ｩ and .[Q.oJ..i s11;o That Ｚｌｳｾ historical scepticism .Q.E.Q lead one to dism·Hl the validity of even gJ:.tEDnp"t.lnr£;' t..9uRhj.1Q- .:'ia kb'::"?l.q. ｾ Carris exposition of historicism and scepticism are very close to lIu33erl f s arguements against irrationalism as presented in our ｃｂａｆｔＸｾ FeUR (cf 9 ｐｾＮＬ pp. 250)0 1+0 ｟C!-i-''''' ｾ･Ｎ 1,·1 , PPo 7. pp" 17 . .I1?)A· , 1+2 Ibid .. , ppe 289-90" l.t3 IQJd" , 13<; !.ttr l.pide 45 I"Q.ir.l., , 46 ｾＱ｝Ｆｭﾷ pp .. 71., , PP6 22" LI-7 CESo . ....... ｟ｾ 1+8 ｰｾ 0 ｾ ppo 17" JbJJl.. , ppco 291., 49 It is in this sense that t,116 tGrm na tural attitude ll and the ttnai.vetyu attributed to it ma.y take on a disparagi g sense, for jf mun is ｮｾｴ ｣ｯｮｾ･ｲ ･､ with this question, he is not concArnod with ｾｩｳ true ｢ＹｩｮｾＮ In the words of Hartln HetdGgger, man, ｬ ｰＱＮＧｯｾｩｭ｡ｲ ｹﾷ｡ｮ､ for the most pa!'t" is "fal1.en u .. That is, man is, for the most part lilost in the \-Jor Jd of 11 is C Jfl:::or· n B and Is Una';J8fe and ind iff'erent to tho phenomenological question. Tlis can easily take on an ･ｴｨｩｾ｡ｬ ｾｯｮ･Ｌ as it o.viol.1s1y does in ｈ･ｩ､･ｧｾ･ｲｬｳ terminology (dispite his protests to the contrary)" 52 cf" our CHAPTER FOHi1 and our ｉｈｔＱ Ｐｄｴｲｾｔ H 1 ON ｾ 53 Although it mal 'be of "mere!J ｢ｩｯｾｲ｡ｰｨｬ｣ inter::lst., we find. fl.n interesttng deccription of HusserlTs personc).l motivattons a.nd at'-:itLlde B.S re::.arc1s the tlsourccll of bis belief in the scope and power of a rigorous Science of Be i.ng and 'tJ e possi biii ty of S lch a Sc ience ｾ :i.n the fol O\'ijn passagec This is taken from a letter written to Arnold Metzger, wherein Russerl tells us of his personal philosophical cOLvictions at the end of the rd.ne ,eanth-century: I still. lived in an almost exclusive dedication to my theoretical work - even though the decisive influences, I'ill teh drove me from mathem8 ties to p 1i10sophy as rny voca t ion may 1ia in overpower :Lng r e ｬｩｾ gious experiences and complete transformatioDsG In· deod, tbe pOIverfnl effect of the Nm·] Testa.i:l.181Jt on a 2j..."'ear old gave rise- to an impetus to discover t118 to God and to a true U,fe througb a rigorous phi losoph j.cal inquir Y..(!:'(:!_'tJ§E. .. ｾ pp", 56) It is on the basts of this and otheJ. paSSa,f(eS that \ole make the claim in our ｮＺｾｒＮｏｄｕｃＱｾｉｯ［ｾ and in our GEAP"'ER F'OUR that Huscerl's ｰｲ･Ｍｰｨ･ｮｯｭｾｮｯｬ ｧｩ｣｡ｬ motiv2tions directed the course of his study to the extent that they directed tho scope of thg,t 'ilhi.eh the pher1omerJologtcal :.ednction \'JOuld ｱｵｳｴｩｯｮｾ Th:i.s passionate need for ｓ｣Ｚｌ･ｲｷ･ｾ clearl.y ev i dont as e<1l' 1y 3S 1882, \'JE"S neve:c for fa i.ted by Russol'l. It is interesting to note in ｰ｡ｳ ｩｮｾ that the tone of this letter as well as the passaRos cited above (pp" 23- f) 18 onf'J of a ｰ｡ｾ［ｳｩｯｮｴ･Ｌ d.r-ivine necessity" Such a tone 1s never revealed in ｈｵｳｾ［･ｲｬ s Il o ffj,cial fl Harks until Part One of the Crisis of Euranean ....Sciences (1935)0 I'Jay Ｍｾ ---------_ ｾＮＭ Ｍ ＧＢ 55 We tond to think, therefore, that when Russerl states uPhilosophy as a scienee, as serious, rigorous, ｬｄ､ｾ ･､ｾ apodietic:al.ly rigorous science ｾ ＮｴｨｾＺ Ｎ ､ｪｾﾧ｟ ｊ ｽｬ ....is QYP.Lo It (ess.; P}o ＳＸＹＩｾ that he is not spealcinfi; of himsr.JJ.f, but of his II folloVJer sl!' and the pass i bility of his life-,\wr k be ing cont inuHd along the U.nv s he bad set dmmo ｲＮＺ［ｾ VI' e i ;')1)1' g .; (.) .;.... _ _ • t .• ｾ ［ ｾ Ｎ ｾ 51? F'l'1· ｾ 58 Ｌｾｳｬｌ｢Ｎ｡ｬ ｖｓ , pp .. 5" PPo' 16,.. ---......._- pp" 210 59 Did Husserl in fact radically put this faith to the test? Has not lithe tf!sttl rather ､ｾｊＺＮｩＱＷ ･､｟Ｑ＿ｙ ｩｨ ｳｾｦＮｻＬＺｬｩＧｴ｢Ｎ＿ That ｩｳｾ Husserl.ts constant critical spirit WaS dofj.ned kd'or8hand as a ｓＨＧＺＮｊｑｄＩｾｕｌｇ｟ＹｬＢｴｩ ....Q." 'I'hllS, as vie maintain tL1 our CHAPTER FOUl\., ･｣ＱｬｾＨｩ｣ｓ itself was nevex' criticized i.n a ｲｃＺｾＮ､Ｇ｣｡ｬ manner" • 62 This, as \fJ8 shall see belovl, can be taken as the beginnings of the notion of tlHorizor/ ' in Eu 'sarlI s ｰｨ･ｮｯｭｬｦｾｙＮ 63 1.1.1 ｾ , Ｖｴｾ ｮｾｪＬｧ 65 b cf c E. HU;:3serl and G. Fre!;e? Ｂｆｲ･ｧ ｾｉ ｬｊＮｳ ･ｲﾷｬ in ｾｴｨＧＬﾷｬ･［Ｚ ｴ･ ..ｴＬｎＱｈｌｑ ｾｲＮＺｉ ＿ｾＮ ｴＲＱ ｑＮ Ｙ ｬｩ｢Ｎｅｌｯ '::orresrondencel! volo 5, no., 3 (197 L+). The follovJir.:S ｰ｡ｳ ｡ｾＨ ｾ in a ＺﾷｃＢｾｴ･ｌ fl'om Frege to Husserl, is especially revealing: One even nov! al Jays takEls it to be the taste of logic to study certain psychic procosses. Logic has in realJty as little to do with this as with Ghe movement of heavenly bodies. Logic, in no way, is part of psychology. The ｰｾｴｨ｡ｧｯｲ･ｮ theorem expresses the ｳ｡｛Ｈｾ･ ｴｨｯｵｴＨ､ｾ for all mer" \-lh11e each person has ｾ ｩｳ own reprosentations, feeling, ｲ･ｳｯｬｵｾｩｯｮ which are d:l.ffex-ent from thQse of 8v:,ry ot.ber 9('J1'80n o Thoughts are not psychic structures, and thinking ts not an i.nn.er producing and fornd.ng, bnt an ｡ｰｐｬｾ･ｨｅＧＡｮｳｩｯｮ of tboughts \vhich are alread.y objectively given. (p:)" 88). 66 F'rr 4.....::--..::.. ., , PPe 17'7 .. 67 lQ.1S1· , pp. 179. 68 I ｢ｾＮ､ ｾ pp. ＲＷＰｾＲＷＱＮ 69 1 .. , pp. 106 70 I12.trt.· 9 pp" 51" 71 IJ?Xd. 72 L1.1., pp. 578. 73 cf .. ?I-1I., and pp" ｴＱＮｾ｡ｮＮＳ｣･ｮ ＱＮ･ｮｴ｡ｬ refle c t Lon, see QH., pp. ＳＲＮｾｬｴｌ 75 I., pp. pp. 2 1-+-5 .. For a co nparison of natural rr.>flection ｬＰＷｾ It is ｩｮｴ･ｲ ｳｴｩｮｾ Ｓｾ 37 and JO}'?, to compare this description of the natura.l attttude 'lith Husserl'g description o. the universal world-belotf in E.;I., pp. 2B-39. Also, yJe should note a peculiar structure of the Ｚｲｾ ｩＭ｜ﾣＮ relevan t. 1ere .. Huch 1ater in the Iil.§Q§..5 Husscrl comes to speak of the Frotodoxa, which can bo seen RS a post-reduction description oft h 8 ｾ Ｈｾ ') era 3. t 11 (] oS is o. t be 11 P.. t ur a 1 at t j, t l1.d e. c f. I., PP • ＲＹＸｾＮ 300 (' As j s so 0 f ten the c ,) s e \v it h the IdeJ.:.'\.§" 1-1 U 8 S e r 1 will re-formulate thRt which :s describcd pre-reduction in line with the in5ights gained through the reduction. 76 I· ｾ PI' .. 11l.j·. ＵＴｾ Tl LI..£..:l. 'i P;)· 78 ｾ Ｚ ｝n'd ｬｾﾷ 79 ｾＭ ｌＢｳ＾ , pp. 90. ＹＸｾ pp. ､ｾ｢ｉ 80 TbIeL, pp. 98 ·99. a 81 _Ib"d ....L_" ｾ pp. 102. 82 Ib:i d. -- ｾ pp,. 102" S- "lb' . ﾷｾｲＱＮ , PIlI) 5')'1 540.. '1-1 .. .J\. , pp. Ｕ ＿ｾＵＸｯ 1 8 Ll- .l1?jd 85 ＬＧＮ Ｒ ｾ (> , pnr'\ ppo 9').J L.(.J') 86 I· ｾ pp. 87 F'TL.• , ｰｾ 88 Pr\ q. f· (J 1 c·L. _.) '" , ppo 80. 89 Ibid .. , 80-81 .. ｰｾ 90 IJ.?JQo 91 prefa£Q .. , 92 ｾ Ｑ 93 See 9 1+ IQi£.. , ｾ pp. vii. cf o also I., pp. 170. pp .. 1360 Ibtd , pp. 135-155. pp .. 253 .. 95 Il2ii,,? pp. 265 .. This task is re-affirmed in the ｯＮｲ ＮｬＧｨＮｾｬＺ ｑＮ ｯ ｬＮＲＺｑ［ \·!herein Hll.sscrl states: ｉ､ｾ ｾ olack of clarity with regard to the ｭ･｡ｮｩ ｾ or essence of cognition requires a Dcience of cognition; a scj.ence whose s Ie end is to clarify tho ･ｳ ＨｾｊｪｴｩＳＱ nature of ｣ｯｾｮｩｴ ｯｮＮ It is not to explain cognition as a psychological fact; it is not to inqnire into the natural causes and laws of development and occurence of cognitions. nather, the task of the critiqu8 of cogni t·' on j.s to c lar j.fy, to cast ｬｩｾｨｴ ｵｰｯｮｾ tbB essencw of ｣ｯｾｮｩｴ ｯｮ an1 tho Bgitimacy of its claim to validity that belongs to its essence; and ｾｨ｡ｴ else can this mean but to make the essence of ｃｏｾﾭ nition cUroctly self-r;iven. err:.., pp .. 25). 0 96 1., pp. 114-115. . 121 pp.. - .. ｾ Ｎ Ｌ " (' 97 1-1' 98 IP., pp. 22 99 ＬＮｾ ｪｑ ｾｰ ffo 1550 100 One of Husscrl is most common and confusing t:l.'a5.ts 1.S to includB within ｾｨ｡ｴ he is saying, an interpretation of Wh8 t and hOi',' he is sayiriE it, and 8.n lnt,8rpreta t. Jon of \.lbat he has said in the ｄ｡ｳｴｾ It is sow:tj.mes ver'y difficult to fiske con?ruouskwhat Busserl does and ｷｨｾｴ Hi).ss8rl p.ays he_J;;..s dolll.Z._ Paul RicOll'SI' poil1ts out a ｰ｡ｲｴｾ icular ex mple of th's tendency. He notes that: ｾ e .the more I ready Husserl, the more I become convinced that the method as Ｎｲｦ ﾧ｣ｊｩｾＺ ..i2.1 drmls the philosopher in a direction t' at is less and less COlUp:3tible \4ith the method as philosophically .in'· igx.JH'etec1. The method HS ｰｲ｡｣ｴｩ｣･Ｇｾ tends to"·n:ucl "th.e- deep€lnlng of the consecration of the ｯＮｲｩｧｊＮｮｾ a1 at t i tude II of enga2':ement in the lvor Id. The inter'preted method tends t,m-lards a solipslsU.c idealism \'Jh ich def in i te ly un ballasts the II J'h ir):;" of its relative alteri.y and does not succeed in accountinB for the absolute alterity of the other, i.e., of the secondOf'rSoD .. (PF:!J\; •• DD. 155). As vle have sala. in OUI' ｾＺ｜｝｢ｉｔﾷｾＮｦｬｄｏｈｲＺｫｉ tha.t which Eusserl l s ,?xnJ-icit proceec1ure (tbe reduction) reveals \vas constnntly inter pI' 8ted and he ld to be enc ofJipas 3ed by h15 In:lPJ. \.9 j.t proceedure (Science). k 101 In fact, ｉ＼Ｑｾ as a \-Jhole can easily prove to be one of Jlusse:£':Lls m.ost misleadJ.nz 1,.;or[(s. Again, the letter to Arr:.old Hetzger giv,s us a ｢ｩｯｧｲ｡ｾ｣ｬ sour G of this unclal'itv. It also shOl'!s that Husserl hjmself felt that thor e \vas no II rad leal br "ak t' i.n inner mo U.V<3 t ion betHeen the LogJ;:.SSJ...L.Jnvest i ｾｂＮｬｩｮﾧ and the Ide.Q.2.. He says: The .Idea§. 11a11e out of pure inner mot lva t lons jl a ｷｯｾｫｩｮ out of a continous, ｵｮＳｾ･ｉｶ｡｢ｬ･ inner will and g r 01,11 t h 5 j ns t ash E! J:...C?sl s ch Q •Ｎｬｲｊｪｾｳ It clL1dnS;.€..lJ.. I do Dot think there has been a development more ｳｴｲ｡ｩｾｨｴ and more certaln of its goal, more ｰｲ･､ｴｭｩｮ･ｾＬ morr:> "ea imonic li • i'Then I publ.i shed the LOf,:i sc'-.:l.....1'.ntG.r.§'ll9.hD.l1'::§..!l, I had on1 a pqinfully divided 103ical conscLousness, so much so that those near me had almost to vJPest the ma.J'-llsc:L'ipt from lf1y hands. I ｦ･ｬｴｾ grO\'Hi T thouEh I did. not knO\·! why, th&t I had 9.S yet neither ft·lly clear philosophical ｦ ｯ ｵ ｾ ｡ ｴ ｩ ｯ ｮ nor pure mRthod, a clear general perspoctive on the work involved. lJrbe.n hOl'J8Ver, 1 ｷｲｯｴｦｾ t1.13 ｾ ｧ ｌ -- in six wenlcs, "\Ilithout even a rOlJ.gh draft to u.iJO as a foundation, as in a ·:rance -- rend them over, and pr'nted them r igb t mvay, I humbly th&.nked God tba t I had been allowed to write thi0 book, and could do no other than to stand by it, jn 3rite of tbe many ｳｨｯｉＧｴ｣ｭｩｮｾｳ of the \'wrk in detatl. ＨｌＢｊｴ ｾｬ ＮＬ pp. 62.) vJe note in passine that those vJno ,vou1r:3 ltsalvase" Husserl from an lI ex :l. s t8nU.alist ｲｕｃｬ､ｩｮｾｴｉ Ｈ･Ｎｾ Robert Sokov!1.oV! Id.) by inte:cp.ceU.ng the later Husserl in tGt'lTIS of' the 1.9.s.Ｎｩｾ .6.l ＬＺｾｬｕｃＮＩ Ｚ ＧｬＡＮｾｌｴ ＿Ｇｬﾧｾｙ Ｑ lnlst n.ecessarily deny any real significant transfo:cm.a t ion or expans ion of ins 19h t to Hus ser 1. It is clear and evident that many of the directions f ｴｨｯｵｾ to co ,2 la.ter ,-.:an be found in germination in the ｌｯｾｩ｣｡ｬ Investi?:aVLolj.-::. But to demand of Husserl th3.t !lis \'Jho"le under the ide2.s impl ic it in his prephenom8nological works does a great disservice to his ､･ｶ ｬｯｾｭ･ｮｴ as a philosopher. Although this statement is somev/hat extreme, it is nOV81'thnJ.ess evtdent ｾｌｮ Robart Soko 10'11 ｾ ki, Hu .S §.9,r 1. ｾＮＡＺＵＱ ｲﾧｾ i ｴ［ＺｊＬｾ (Evanston: HOI'th l/) es tcr n University ｐＬｲ･ｳ ｾ ＱＹＷｾＩＮ ｣ｯｲｰｵｳＭ｢･ ｳｴｊｾｨｳｬＱｭ･､ 102 It becomes more and more difficult to understand Why Husser 1 chose t':--ls proceedure? espec ially wheE he admi ts in the Introduction to the Ideas that: " ｾ .. most empha t ically:'-'-.--'·: the ｐｬ ｩ｟ｾ Ｎｮ ｬ ･ nOll1enc:loa;y , to I'J"l-lich in \'lha.t 1'011 ,,,is ':/e "10l;I:J Jr:3t,[t.re t'18 ',-Jay of approac , the same which emerged for the first ti.me in t11e ｩＮﾧ ｴ､ｵＺｊｽｬｍｾ｡ＺｩｺｑＡ｢ and ba,C' revealed an even ric11er ane deeper moaning to l"lll:; as my ｴｨｯｊｾ 11.:15 dw(.?lled on it through the last ten ｹｾＧ｡ｲｳＹ is Ｑ ＰｴＬ｟Ｎｑﾧ ｙｳＺｬ ｃ＿ＱＡｾ ＮＺｚＬ nnd that it is n t ac .idental ､･ｾ limitati0ns and considerations of ｴｾｲｭｩｮｯｬ ｧｊ but on E 'oands of ｊｬＮｲｩ ｣ＮｩｄｾﾧＮ 'l1hich forbids its ｢･ｩｮｾ comted as psyci:.olo;.>y • • ". It is i.tself as lit.tle ijentifia. ble with ｊｳｹＬＮＺ［ Ｉｯｬ ［ｾｹ as is geometry \.j i th na tura 1 sci.en-.;s. (I., pp. tr2) .. Because of this, the pedagogi:.::al 113turc of (;ha.l,ter rout' of ｉ｣ＺＮ ｾ ﾧ ｊｌ must be kept in mind, and cannot lJe too stronGly ernpllas :L?ed J.03 ill&., pp. 6 .. 106 ｬｾＺ ｃＮ , pp.. 122" For J:'ef8rence to tl1e use of te r !ninology and the ｮ･ｾ ｳ ｩｴｹ of ke0ping ones use of terms fluid in the beginnjns stages of 3cienctific work, cf" I., pp. 2 1t 1+_ 2LI :; ., 10'7 T .:::",. 108 Ｎｾｌ Ｍ ［ Ｚ , pp • 126. Tb' ., , pp,. 11()" 109 IlJ..t\l· , 110 , pp. ｊ｢ｾ､Ｎ ppo 124 .. 14· Lt" 111 We feel that Fusserl 1 s work is hard cnolfh to understand without SUC1 an ｯｶ･ｲｾｩｧｨｴ on the par' f the translntor such that he did not in all ｣｡Ｘ･ｾ insert the German terms ｂｾｬＧｊ＾ｑＮ ＺｲｾｊＮ aId ｉｾ ﾧ ..ｻＬＮｬｌｾｊＧ｢ ir the text. Tr'is \l!onl(l bava helped avoid fl,ariy confusiorls. Boyce-G:L:J::; n consistantly translated bo t h If.r. L9'::!1lt,2. 3.11':1 ｾＱＳ fa Ql.:.:Jl1& a s II ex p. e r i e n c e :t [\ nr] ｬ ｾ a nei r. ] 0 S II ., p."" "1 H J l' -l. , • t' ＧＮｾ J J ," Ｎｾ l' 1: t h ｾ ,' ' ,:, ., . L.:.:ll... ｾﾷ .9, .!. _'0 ,. " l"lOLl 1_1 a.. ｃ ｲ ｬ ｾ ｾＧｊ ｬｮｾ :X/l.IJ?: . ｾ ＬＭ［ｾ L man • 1 0 • '1 6flui.va18.ot. 112 I· , 139. ｰｾ . Ibj ., _.5,.:.,. 113 _ , pp. llLl- j.tU;.(l· , pp. 155. lLl-j - Ibig,· c Ti':"1 , pD • 155. 116 .-:.::;;".'?. 115 11'7 1., pp. 150 ff. cf. also Ib:tg.., pp. 154" It seGms that Husser-I insists on agra'Jating thi.s tendency by calling the spllero of Dure ｣ｯｮｳ｣ｩｯｵｳｲｾ･ｳ a Illj.mited. i'iI3ld" r:C, un .. 17b). ｾ･ ｦｾ･ｬ that it takes on the ｄ Ｒｾｲ｡ｮ｣･ of a ｬｾｩｴ･､ field or of a. rE-;sion amOIl':!: othel'S, y if-one allO\·}s the on remenants of a ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬｇｩｾ｡ view of consciousness to interceed. Yet it is precisely this int'?rcession that t.8 phr;wo·illanological reduction is supposed to avert: We ffilst point out that this does not l''?sult in a ｭｾｈＧ･ textnil difficulty. Far mOl'e than thi.s, j.t le(J.ds to a very common accusatj.on agaj.nst Busserl, the ｡ｃｾ ｵｳＸｴＧｌｯｮＬ .' hat is, of ｜ｉｾｵ｢ｪｇ｣ｴｩｶ ｳｬｮｴ • Fusser 1 say::. tha t he is ＧＺ ［ｯｩｮｾ to ana tyze ﾧｬＱＮ ｾ［ｪｽ＿Ｎ ｾｴｪｹＩＮｴ ｙｯ I-:m1 if that subjectivity is a region ｡ｭｯｮｾ others, a limited ｦｩ･ｬ､ｾ that. regi.on must te kept disthl.ct from otbe.r regions., A study of subjectivity becoffi2s a " su bjecti\lisw 1t \.,JheD the region 0.' sphpre is ｯｶ･ｉＧ･ｸＮｴ･ｮ､Ｈｾ､ jnto other ｲ･ｾｪｯｮｳ and becow:1s tho Wlnnel.' in vlbi.ch those other I' r;10n5 are interpreted. Therefore, when Russerl ｢･ｾｩｮｳ to speak of ｯｧｪＮＹ｟｣ｴｾ in the ｬＮ､ ｾ Ｚ＿ＮＧｩＬ he can easily be accused of subject iVism, for it seems that he has overextended the l'm1ted fiAld or region of subjectivity ｡ｮｾ interpreted another reelon in ｴｾｲｭｳ of it. Tl us the preliminary psycnological exe',os it ion 0.: conse icusne ss 1s not only mislead ing, j t is, more stronely, ｦｬＮｊ ｭｯｳｌｊＬＮｌｾ ＲｩｕＺｾｑｬｹ ｾＮﾧ Ａｾ ｊＮｭｾｉＡｴｒｾ to the authentic ::lnd cHntra 1 l1IGanhig of phenowenology. 118 fl Ｚｾ Ｎ ｾ , ,-' ..... pp. 100. 119 Ibtr1· ...... 120 121 ｾＮ I-l , -, ＺＮ ｾ Ｂ Ｎｾ 1 p. 180. 5 ,-. 1:.... pp. 127. pp$ 136. ? 122 LI ｾｊＺＮＧ , PPo ＢＳＶＲﾷｾＰ r-- i '1 12.3 .-;.!:S.!::.:.." ｾ pp., 25r;..... 12 1+ IbjrJ.• , pp. 256 " 125 LE· , .1p. 3 • 126 ﾷｬｃＮＺＩ｟ｾ -I-b' , 12.7 .H?1cl. <. ＱｾＲｇ !?;\,S. pp" , pp. 3' l ｾ .J ｾ G .1. 6 pp. 35u r-- Pl1'29 J..'.."? 130 ')5 9 2. I· , pp. 83. 131 Ib:i.:l· , pp 1.32 I his.1" ? T - . , pp" 21. lOLL pp. 110 .. 133 .=-01<1,_ , 134 Jbid. , pp. 103. 135 IQ.;\.J. . . / ＮｾＺＡ［Ｎ T h • ｲｾ f L.:>C' is -' -!-, t""l;.jp ."a::>e )ＧｾＭｴｨ 11 .e ＬｾＮＺ［｟ I 'eel" P.. ｲｾ＾ＺＮ［ｾｵ c: co '" vO 0 ....(' ••ｮｾＭｌ 1 5\..) returns to certain issues th3t are raised before th0 Q n - '/1ｾ ｨＨＧｬｾ been ｧ･ｲ｟ｦｯＱＮＧｭ･､ｾ after the reonr.tion hi:"-s been effected. ｾ･ haVE: already seen this evidenced in our note '75 ';lith respect to the l.latural attitn:le. l"m.J \,18 can th(.; sall.8 proceedl 1 re fo!.LO\'l2d 1..1 ith rr.:spect to the reduction itself; in IdeR§., Fusserl speaks of the Il neutraLLty-modifie a t i 0 1.1 1I Ln the f 0 1 1 0 \.,J in:b ffii:F n e l' : ａｭｯｮｾ the modific3tions ｷ ｨ ｩ ｾ ｨ ｲｾｬ｡ｴ･ to the sphere of B91ief, \'Ie have still to indicate one of thB hi::;h est imnortance ｜ｶｨｩｾｨ ｯ｣ｾｵｮｩＮ･ｳ a nosition all by. t- selfb ..t' 1.. eduction J. I- J and shoi31d therefore in no '.-Iay be placed on a l-L.ne vlLth those so fill' discussed. (1-, pp. 30(J). He goes on to say that: ＧｾＬｊ･ arc ｣Ｑ･ＬＺｾｬｌｊＧＺ nm'l I'lith :'3, morUfi.cation \·J}"ich in a certain sense completely removes anrl renders powerless every dOKic ｾｯ､ＸＱｴ ｹ to wh ch it is related, but in a totRlly rtifferent ｷｾｹ from that of negation, ｷｾｩ｣ｨＬ in addition, 8S ｾ･ saw, shows in 1,eut:j'l'e'1 a｟ｾＮＺ＾ f'oc'1"+j'1 "L C • '" c_. , ,. .- v CJｾ f.jPfpr.J._. _ _ ｾＧＮ L. ｾ ca •nor-. J I . heil.. .j to' 1,,11-·-jel'"1 ". _ f . . . r' ,.., nrlO"'''' Ｇ ｾ Ｉ ｉ ｾ Ｇ ｬ r·t C"l'C(:ll C no·\,1,11"0' 1 tlP'''l'_ Jt l- J. . . . . I.,;; J.e ....... _l,:..-,c. c... Ｎｾ［ｊ｟Ｚ lJ _J". l,"'j" .' f01.'m.s It I10th :LnG , it t s the cc'nse taus c:oun ,or pa r t of ﾷｴｨ｣ｾ • ,,_ oJ eel ,.. .;- rj' J' •• " l .0..)..,;._ 8.1J. perfoI':TInnc8: its ｄＮ ﾧ［ｬ ｴｲＮＳｊｌｩｾＮ［ＱＨｴｑＮｬ (I,., ppo 306). rr'" ' s .. pos·.>r8o.uCL.l011, l··.l- ' 1 ']'" _illS )cl ｶｾｮ ＺＨＩｮ･ｲＮｬｯｾＧｬ • ｾｲＬｯ .. ogJ.'cL. l1.r:;scrlj) t· ,10I) of the rGducti.on itself and h(21'e it ls ::>'?t "into ｉＧｇｬｩＨｾｦ 8.gainst the various other fo:rmE, of doxie modalities ( 0Ｌｾ ｾ ｾｯ｡ｙＧ '-"vb'''' l>. N i:). ｮｾｐﾷＱｭｱｴｬｯ d, 0..1. I. .1.1,,<--. d v l .":ltl .) ［ｾＨ＾Ｌ·.. 1;1 ｯｾ｣Ｎｾ t, •• ) • P')If) 15-'). _ 0 1D"'rl"'ans PUr'SD]·.1 ch011'J ｾ ｲｬＧｾ.ｬ･ 0 . ,..... ｾＮ \ ...... ! l ＮＡＬｾ ,,:;(.':.1..1..1. II. ｾ ,.8. sense \>Jhiel1 'honcst and f:,enuiri8 phi.losopl--Jy ean ll ,,] lor ｬｾｏｙｉ some 1(')1'1'1' ｾｨﾷＧＬ｜ｃ｣ｯ .:1 rl"oc· L1nnO\'AJ'O 'Ol,·t np'ler '.. C1..... . . ..1.• pC! . ".... l'J v certajrJ.y alte3' the sense of' 7.!"8 \'1 rJ....1 thl'ou:;t1 t1'cir effort..s ｾ ｾｨ［ ｨ｣ｬ｜Ｈｾ onLy to J.ookc;.t pl1j.losorlhers Vi l lO spen.k of• ｩｬ｣Ｇｃ＾ｉｾＡＺ＾ ...., __ J •.)-./ dElta!; 9.r-cl l:eolo p na)·('"r1l3(··11 ,,11 qr rpf"''''rjrp \ ..... C jJcL . . • .) c _ {:) t' 0 vL.lJal !-,,)rception, \.]biclJ I personally h<1'.'8 never ･ｸｰ｣ｬＧｩｅｵＱ｣ＨＺｾ､ ｾＮ ＭｴＬＮｾ oJ 'V ｾ ｾ J . 0 ...... .;... _ ... 1.1 Ul' .. \.,,(, ｾ I. \.",J ..... l- ｾＮＬ ... in perc e /c ion. 138 1., , 139 KTI'E· l LtO ﾷｬｾＮｴ＿ｊ 1 1.t1 ｾＺＮ［ ..., f. 107. pp" , , , ppo pp" ｬｌｾＮ 9 19 • ＱＹｾＲＰＮ ppe 20 • Ibi;l • .. L r:; Ibid •• Pi'e 1 t/ 3" ppe 23. 142 Thh.::l· , ppe T' . d J.}+ 3 .";':.D.L" ｾﾷＲ _____ J '5 " ,) lL+6 Af;atn F:Lnk gi 'J8S US clear outline of that '.'lhich is involved in the performance of the reduction. TIe states r. that: The transcending of the world which takes place in pel' cru:Lng the pheno'i.enc'lo,:"ical ｲＨ､ｬｾｲ［ｴｩｯｮ ､ｯｾ＿ｳ not lead outside of or away from the world to an origin ｷｾｩ｣ｨ :Ls senarate from the world (and to which the world is ｣ｯｾｮ･｣ｴ ､ only by some ｲ ｾ ｡ ｴ ｩ ｯ ｮ Ｉ as if leading us to SOffiE"; 21:.)1(:.:.... l.varla; the ｰｨ･ｮｯｭＸｲｊｯｬ ｾｩＨ［ＸＮｬ of the worlrt, as the disclosure of sllbjectivity, is ,:Jt tile same timp. the ｲ･ｴ ｾｲＱＧＮｪ ｯｮ 0,1 th r.> \<}()r]rl 'v-iithin the ｵ｛､ＮｶＨＩｬＧｾ ＨＩ of a ｢ｳｯｬｾＭＢＧｦ･ＨＡＩＺｩｉｆｨ｡ｴＬｱＳｮ eXDosed. 'Tbe l:lOl'Ll l'Gl!iain.:;> ｩｭｬ ＱＧ ｲ ｃ ｮＭＺｾＮ to th': .qhsolute afJd is disCOV61.'od as ｬｹ ［ﾷＧｾＭ ｩＭｲｴｨｪ｟ｮ it. In t 1 '18 viOY, the Ｉｬ｢ｯｮ ｾ ｭ･ｮｯｬ ｲ［ｩｾ｡ｬ Ｎｲ･､ｬＩＺｾｴ ｯｮ ｾｩｯｲＺ＾ｳ not :purely transc8nd the I'loI'Ll lm.t only ｴｨＨｾ lirl"LLtcdnnss of' t'he 1 atura1 at t i. tud e. " • from '\'! h ｩｾ h ＭｲＮ｝ｴ［ｪ＿ｾﾷ･ｰｨ i lOSOf)h ip, s or ｌｾ in ate aD'l to vd"ictl thAy remain re1A.tc:d \"r"len the S:06cu1atlvely post111ate a "trcu,scendr-:r:d;lI i}JOrl:-l origin. ( 1ｾＧ［ｑ 1 <,-, ppe or, /'/ ) ｾ This ｾ｡ｳ ｡Ｓ｣ will not become fully clear until our ｴｲ｡ｮｳ｣ａ､ｩｾ ｴＮ｣ｦｊＮｮｳ｣ｲ［ｮＭＺｊ＼［ｮｴｾｬ "1T"L;' '1"r') --., h:\ .. ':' }.'la:.> run ,,..., \..ot'!'-r.l.:'t'i. ｬｾＺ ［ 't ｃｏｬｵＺｾ ･Ｎ ,. I-iO\'I('ver, \\lC may say for nOH th:)1, instead of' positjns; a ｴｲｄＮｮｳｾ･､ o.r.ir;in, ｰｨｾＺｲｊｯｭ･ｲＬｯｬ ｲ［ｙ ..v:'l.fJ:1GS ·to shO\\' world-origin. cf. pp. 132-135 btlow. ｬｌｾＧ , ("<'/, ｾＮ pp. \oJ .n rld or a transcendental ＲＰｾ P' , PP* 1)-11. 1 LI8 ,:.:1. .... 1.1.0/ T i . l, ｾ 5 pp • '4 150 Ｌｯｾ｟Ｌ II .., 151 Ｎｦｾ . pp. LI3 ｾ note 237 below. 153 ･ｊＧｾ OI1lE to the pos t tion if; our ｃ ｾ ａ Ｎ ｐ Ｇ ｾ ｧ ＿ Ｎ 0'CTTR Uwt (most certainly .rIot ｡ＨＺ Ｇ ｯｩＧ､ ｮｾ to Eusser1) :i.Lt.l::. the red II C t i 0 Xl , P11 i 10 30 P'l Y 0 S a 1:' i r:; 0 r 0 lJ. S ;' c i e n ceo f Be in::; i s not p):3.3i')lc. 'The l1D('riti.. ::al re·..ｮｯＮｩｴ｡ｾＮ＼ｴｳｮ of the soal of Science after the ｄ･ｲｦｯｲｭ｡ｮｾ･ of the reduction we take to b8 D. den1nl ot the ｩｮｳ ｾｨｴ of the ｲ･､ｵｾｴｩｯｮＮ cf. our ｾ ｦＯ P';,ER }-i'CUR, IJ;','[{ODlr'TION and note 237" 19-1 JP., pp. 23. 155 Tbi.i., pp. 3' . ｾ . t . ｾ｜ＬＮ t..l1e second ' . i:.100 . ser..J d'lu na In .. a·Ul, ln _ eal 01nth . e t..ＧﾧｑＮ.ｾｌ tha t phenome DO logy \'!8 s Ie ft s tanc1 ｾ 1Qzi.£!ll._ J [2.y'e oS t. ｱＮｾｲｩ ing as a ::le SCI' 1pU.va psyc: ho ｬｯｾｹＬ B ltholl{h h8 viOL Id Df?'J e1' 156 1ｾﾷＮｵ ｳ T allow it to be seen as a sub-iomain of empirical psychology. (cf. 11.:...1 ., IP4 261-264-, 1,-,herein one Cl.D cOii1pal't.. the ;:>,im8 and m8tho:1s of' the first (1901) and second (1913) edit:i.ons of the ｉｊｯＴＺ Ｉｾｊｮ ＯｦｾＺ ［ｴＺｬ ＱＲＮｴ ｾｑｮＮﾧ • He, can see that the pI'ee:Lse reason for t;'is equRtiofl of pheliomenolo:-:y \vith descr:' ptive psyc:"o. ｯｾｹ in thj.s context is thAt in these in··· 'vestigr-\tiofJS, ｽｔｵｾｪｳＨｊｲｬ ､ＨｾＺ ｊＱｳ solely vIi trl the real (££01.)..:.") elemefits of experiRnce and has not yet con:ernGd ｨｪｾｳＸｬｦ with ｩｮｴ･ｾｴｩｯｄ｡ｬ objectivity. This is clearly revealed i n ｉＺＮｾｬＬ pp • 576, f n t . L c f. a l S 0 .; ｴｾＺＳＮＬ PP • 23 Lj • 157 Ie, PPe )+1. 158 IT", 159 ＬＮＲｩｾｬｉ 30. pr. pp. 48-9. f 160 c." ｌ "'CPI ｾＮ ,)r;:". Ｒ ｲ Ｎ ｾ I pp. ,-)\.,'));' :...., pp. 25 - - 26 - ｾ ,,'!".' pr. r5 c: -·0r｡ｮｾ transcendental sub- ｾ Pf for a comparison of psycholog'ical ｪＨｾ｣ｴｩｶｴ｣ｹｾ ,1. f:) 2 "'1 C 1. _u ｾＬ ＯＧｾ 1"'1 ,ｬ co __ ＬＮ Ｚ Ｈ ｊｾ 167 I., 168 Ib1:.:1., pp. 8?ｾ Ｌ - ?/+ e, I-Jd r ) .'l" " ]:.. J)P.' . 2 L,' = v PPu 8. Italics are mine. pp" 50. 5'. pp. 260. PI'. 92. 169 ｊ｢ｾＬ ＹＮ 170 .I1?i1., PP. 108" 171 ,lb11o, ppe 110-' ll" 172 ｾﾷＷＮＱＧ E,I:.. PP a 12- 3. A'r 1'" -" .!is 1.lJ:3SCl'. ｓｬｾｲｯｳ ･ｓＬｬｃＺｌＬＺ )'.n ti-.le 1",:] C' • • • no attempt is m8 rle to ZU'l'Y Gut syster'1at;j,c8l1y the transcendental ｫｲｯｷｬｾ､Ｚ･ thRt C3n he ohtained ｴｨｲｯｬｊｾｨ ｬｯｾｩ ｡ｬ dedw:ti.on. (1., pp. 12). in the transcendental ｳｾｨ･ｲ we have an infinitude of ｫｮｯｷｬ･､ｾｇ previous to all deduction, ｫｮｯｾｬ･､ｳ･ whose mediated connexions • • • have nothing to do \'Jith ､･｣ＱｵｾＺ ｴｩｯｮ 0., pp. 12). o •• 0 c f.• a.l ＬＮ ｦｬｴｉｾＱＵＷＧ e' ,)0 ｾＮT" ＡＲ Ｌ［ＱＺＭＮｑ ｾ ｾ pp pp. 2. 0 20"'-t-<:..'')Or::::>. _ .. 177 Ｚ･ｲ｡ｰｭｯｾＧ ｾＩ＼ｬＳＸｩｲｬ 'l!hcn directs itself ･ｮ｣ｄＮｰｳｬ ｡ＱＮＺ Ｈ ､Ｎｾ ｴｨｌｾｴ sll.ch ｳｯｭ･ｴｲｾｩｄｧ and out of it hAS b28n pro; imally but it,s prirnal'Y kind of ｂ･ｩ｣ｾ it, it is ｡ｨＡｾＩｹｳ 'oLltsi.dp.' ｡ｬｯｮＬＺ［ ＾ｪＮＨｬ ｾ Orl] ii:ies graspes it, it does Dot aD inner sphe}G in ｾｨﾷＮ･ｨ tOI/laT'd'> fi.rst ｳｯｾ･ｨｯｷ ｾ･ｴ \-It-li,ell i t (mccunte.rs ClU] \·J'n.1ch ｾＧｮｯｊ･｢ to a '·Jorld all' ·:aoy d iscover-:Jd. J'or is any inner sphere a ｾ｡ｮ､ｯ･ \oIhnn Daseln CLvlOl1s alo{J',vidc the (:!nt.ity to be knmvn, and dctnrMines 'Bc']' ) '. st ·'1 1' ' .. ＧｬＢ ｾｬＧ､Ｂｩ J_ too . . . e·, c' "" ,:H;.10 a ｂ･ｩｮｅＧＭｴｨＮｾＬ［ｯ ｑＮＺ［｟ｳｾＬｕ､ ｌｬｾ _'';, 4-11 ｬｾ -j. v.,o v .oL'" . v "J' _ ｯｬＭ ＨｲｾｬＮＧＨ Ｚ ＾ ... (.:t :..) _ 1'/.' _'. """ 1/....... ｏＢｾ (" ...... ｾ 'f '''';,., '" ...... ｉＧｲＩｾ･ＭＧ ｾＢＬｲｾＧ-{ｬ U l' t '-1·'(-1 obJ·pt'J· "Q'"'e)' v I... .... .....,. l-l' ｊｾ . '"1 'i" .... :::> .L _..f (. ... 1",..4<.,:> 1.:)t... Ｎ｜ｊｌ Ｔｾ l' :;;.- ]·r l-hp. . t t.J .' J l I J. • 1· l. .. ｾ "1 Ir't .;;'0:::. ﾷｾｦ .I nＮＧｾｊ ｾ Ａｌｾ v. A ｾ r "Or-'"'p.c·'r ........:_ ｾ J r- C li0 .. ld·\'J)-5.ch knoi.vs o And lllrt.hGrmor·e, tbe l)srcieviD9; of wh"Jt is knmvn is not a procpss of ｬＧ･ｴＮｵｲＧｮｩ ｾ［ Ivit11 one':.:; bcoty to ﾷｾｨ･ 'cabinc{.l of consciousnos.3 3C"Lcr one ｴｾｳ t:0fJ8 out and ﾷｾｲ｡ｳｰﾷ＿［ＱＮ it; even in perceiving, retainin1 and ｰｲＸｳ･ｲｶｩｮｾＬ the Dasein vJ::iroh \{";O\,IS rcr:13.in.:> onts:Vls and it does so l''"\m -. ("\ ..... Jo-..,...0o·--l_·;;r-=:>-,-·-_·.. . ." " ') . ......l ("" '. ( 178 ....Tp_. , pp • l.18. 179 Q}: pp. 33. 130 ＬＮｾ G , I· , 182 KITF. , pp. ＺＡ］ｾ "Lf 0 ｟Ｚ［ｾＮ 1" e' () /, ｾ ,.l,-J(_). ppo 166 • pp. 150. ;'(':'1L 181 183 character; but even in the ｩｾｳ Do··O 11""'LC]':"! .:) .J ｾＬ . e , pp. ｊｾＹ ./ 1)+ .. . 18 t l· I· ) pp" 398. 185 G. B. 1::td i son, lIPhenomerJology an'O Exis tr:nt 1a1 ism: HUSSE:.rl and. the ｾ ｮ､ of Ideali"iT:!! in .FussEr1: :.>:'·'031 .... 10[IS - - - - -.. . . . . --------..-"'Y. _ ...F. Elleston, e.::l.s. (,30uth QI1CUJ2I:.r.(?-,3.cl19s, P. lrc:'::o'Cmicl-: ｡ｲｾ､ ｂ･ｮ､ｾ ｕｮｩｶｴｾｲＬｳｩｴｹ JC",ili2 Press, fortbr.:omin:;; ｰ ｾ 2. (Fa:;:i.);'.'tion citcc.. 11.'::1'e i.s IrOnl an unpublished versjon of this tex.t prssented at Hc;·faster University, 197 t j). of 186 !., pp. 413 and 187 .-2.::', 1 °):') t'f ｾ • 0 pp .. ""p L., 62. I""0:JJ.1 0 ＮＸｾＱ 189 Ye t t be v 8 1 i d it Y 0 f lis q iJ e ｾ Y. ). 0 n i t elf mu s t. be queationed. We see herg the ｴｲ｡､ｩｴ ｾ ｡ｬ epistemological question bcin ｾ ｮＮＳｬＺｾ､ ｾ • • • LmJ C,9.fJ ｴｾｩｳ ';nme, 'vih'ich ｴ｡ｾＺ･ｳ 1,18ce ill t,11e _ tH' e ly immanont 1. i fc of.' C(lnSC iOlJsr.e 58, a Cju iI' e o b,j pr· t i 'JO <" i o-r-i +'1' {' ':' l",r 0'> :: ("'1, l'S i.l-L l"OC: -:0'; b 1 e' 1.+'0"1' evj,d""l1CG • • • to clnim tu be ｲｾｯＡＧ･ than:3. mere aspect of ｭｾｲ Ol;J1) <.:c.-f!3(;}.ousfless? (PI;,., pp. 31). This esscnU.olly o.sks H • • • hm! can I Get outside of my j,slanc'J. of con::;ciOlJSflG3S •• ?H (PLo. DU. 32). EmJ can t\'JO real thinc:,s il'l t'JO \·}orld (sl,1bjec, and. object) coo-· 'Gact one anot.her in kr. ',-ll::C),'1,6 if on"'l is outside of and c1 i s t n J. n c t fro Iii t 11 e 0 the l' ? The formul[lt;ton of tbe eplster.GologicDl CjllB:-J7,ion :i.n this ml)[;l"1':!r rl'3ces,:;i- riT.es t1":3.t, in a sense, the ｃ［ｩｊＬｾＺ ﾣ＾ｴｩｯｮ has already bt> ､･ｲＡＬｾｳｮＮＳ or, more prec:iscly that an anS;,Jer bas ｡ｬ Ｇ･｛ｾ｣Ｑｹ been prrisl1.pposed 1,r:. the fO:L'mulDtion of the question itself. ｾｵＳｳ･ｲｬ states: ｔＮ ｃ ｌ ｴＮ ｾ e Ｎ｟ｑｺＺｾｮｴ .. _..ｾｩＬＮＡＺ ｴ ｧ｟ｪＺ［Ｇ ｾＮｑ ｲＲＱＺ＿ ｌｾＬ yＮｑｾＺｊｙ ｾ＿ｊ｟ ｦｾＬ｟ｊｌｬｪＺＮ r:sl.l. human I..._ ... :)feSll":oosc ｡ ｄ ｔ ｊ ｲ Ｈ ｾ-_._ ｬ ［ ･ ｲ ｙ ｬ Ｈ ､ ..............__..... _ . ._.................... .. a sn:';U.81. _ _,__... ｢ＹｩｲｾＺｊＧＮ _,,_.::t.J.. .., ba',Ii!:r! ._.. realitv • . I have cor:::elved of n:yself as n be::'Lq' 'tn -s}-:;acE::, in TNbich I con .... eqlJ.ently h9:ve an ol.ltside ｾｦ myself: Is it not true that the ｭ･｡ｮｻ ｾ of the question pr9supposes the validj_ty of the pel'cepti.on of <:' ｾＮ［ ..., ..... " , " ...l. ... ... .1 1. ｾ 'oJ ｾ • J-'.' .... ....__ ｾ｟ｾ 7 .,l, ........ ｾ ..l.. .. ｟ｾ｟ ｾ｟ ｾ 4 .... ... _ ........ _ - . . _ · _ q ﾷｴＧ ｾ ,(" c., ＯｾｶｩｴｊＧ Ｎｦｪ｢ｯ , ve th 'JQ1"'!-Ol .. _. ,U Ｂｕｯ｣ｾｬＧｲＹ \..{ ｜ＭＧｬ ･｛ Ｚ ＾ Ｉｾ I, , -::.. _l;:> a1"-1 .1.. ",·'«-ti:i 'J Ｇｾ ｾｬＭ .L. .I. Ｂ ｌ ﾷ ｜ Ｇ ｳ Ｍ ｾ ｶ Ｇ ｬ ｃ ｮＩ ｾ J C J. ,_ '-'. j ' , ".j ｾ｣ W,.l. '-' \laUdity "hould afpear as t.he peply to _",j ｾＮｪ l! v (PT ｾＮＬ • I'}' J) " ＳｾＧ ＨＮｾ I l!) Tbis is to say .hat the \,.'Orld.,-appcrception involved in the formulation of the traditional ･ｰｩｳｴ･ｭｯｬ ｾｩ ｡ｬ question is supposed (is valid alwad of time and it Ilcolorsli this very formulation. I su.pose ahead of tims that I am a hl.1man oein.'3 in the T/JorL:l Ｑｾｮ that ｯ｢ｪｾ｣ｴｳ are ｳ･ｰ｡ｾ rate ｦｲｯｾ me in the real sense. By pres lpposing this, I also presuppose that the question of the possibility of lWOi·Jled.g!;;; is a. question of llo\:J thf2se hie) real t'n:Lnf,s, U"e object, can conta,::t one en;)T real psych.ic pl'osess an r anotLer. Thts prE-).sllpposition is taken a3 vali r , \.Jhere::ts it j,s ureciselv ｴｾｩｳ ｰｲ･ｳｵｰｾｯｳｩｴｪＮｯｮ which should be ･ｰｩｳｴ＿ｔｉｯｬＭＺｾ｡ ＰｉＧｩｴｾ･Ｎ })ut int.o quest'ion by a Ｂ｡､ｩｾｬ Ha'the.t' tta-n bein; q l l'2stiollcd radically, t'his "'lOl'ldaJDercention is taken for ｾｲ｡ｮｴ･､ to tho extent that it II.· .. ｨＬｾｓ alI'eady' en-:81'2d into the sense assuned in the asking of: the question, II ＨｃＺｾＮＬ pp. (3). All of tilts ShO",lS us that the :;osing or 'he trad·" itionul formulation of the ･ ｰ ｩ ｳ ｴ ･ ｭ ｯ ｬ ｾ ｩ ｣ ｡ ｬ question is assuminG -t',hat \'I\"ich it is atL,em;:;tin:; to que3tion. This sbo\'JS fori.::_ the novelty of ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹＮ In fact, ｅｬｊｳ Ｈｾｲｬ goes as far 83 to say the ｦｯｬ ｯｾｩｮｧＺ . . . . of ＧＬｊｨｾＩｴ relevance here is the transcen rlen;,:al sclf-examinF..tion f plV:'UloE1enology? Fothins; other tlian that it S'10i-IS tr e ent· re problem to ｢ｾ coojr) t t· a d J,· c t.- 0 r y I C"I .t:.=.., PP ｪｾｬ c.. ｾ <. 0 - .) It is of tntel"cst 1101.'8 to compare I,Jhat ｾＧｉ･ h<:1'..'2 saLd. in tli 1. S con e;.: t v} 1 t 11 F j J l\. I S c1 e .f j. nit . 0 n 0 f the rEd i cal it: y of tile reduction in 22., pn o 110. 'fhi.s (l1so tr,l'OltIS light on Fi0{IS stntemJnt: 1 • ｾ .every expltc9tion of the a priori ｰｲ･ｾｩｶ･ｮ ｣ｳ of the \,wl'lri ｲｾ ｊｄＮｴｮ［ Ｎ UpOll the basis of the n:l.tuI'[-ll atti.tU.'Je ns lon"'; ;..15 m::J.n renL ins rlefir,Ed as UF.lt Ｎｳｵ｢ｪｾｽ｣ｴｪＬ｜ ity ','1ith reference to vJhic:h 'l)-,is problBIL ;_. s tC) be> ,,-1 'r 'i]('l.' e,lt c ('pI"" t. ) '') ｾ 1 1 J\ \) . I,")' -.,. ......... ＺＮＢｾ［ ｾ lJl Han is Uie s l!Jj,::.ct Hith refcren .. e to \tlhich the tradi·· tlonal ･ｰｬｳｴ･ｾｯｬ ｾｩ｣｡ｬ question is nsked, in thRt it asl s ho\·} T tr:ts ｨｵｭＺ［ｬＮｊｾ ｢ｲｾｩｦ ｚ c:x-isttn.=: in tllf3 VJol'ld, Ce1.t) i" ., , h .LCc;C <- Ｂｾ［Ｌｬ 0l.!1,1 t" '.'l.Ld,:,.:> ; n·"" c " 111 '-!, h"" h. ,'JOI"1 r' d., " 1.S., 1· .' '" '", O,lJeC ':>. J''Inn cannot be ｴｾ･ subjac with reference to wh'ch the lfuenomcnaiog'cal <.l1lf.· ;,tion is ｰｯ［Ｚ ＼ｾ､ Ｎ ｦＧｯｴ ｾ seen :in G radit:::al manner, m"trl hims'3lf (ciS a "special oi),iect" .tIL tllf '. ;01'1;.9) is part of 'I,hat VCy'y Ｑｯｊ ｲｬ､Ｍｰｲ･ｾＮＡＬｩｾＱＹｮ ･ｳ \,;h:i..dl is pu.t into ｱｕＸＺＮ ｾｴｩＮｯｮ 4 J.91 192 233. ).93 ＱＹｾ I ftnd Huss(..::rl' s t8r'fni.nolosY" on ·this poi.nt despara Gcly not simply incorrect. The use 0 the world mis. eading i Il t'l"'J ｾｲｯ .... y,11r .... ｃｬｾ Cli°\.-] a<' ｴｬｾＬｲＮｴﾷｬ ＧＺ ｬ｝｜Ｇﾷ ':11"'8'1'1 OJ" "p,r>t""'l'l" c.r... .L .:.l_ ....... t v ｾ｟ ::J expel' hll ced II could lead one to say tho. t if I am ac tU8.1 J.y ll ac ; J .... J..JI .(,;'• .,::11::"... 0 Uvv (...0. :.:. 'J .. .L ... 1..,-" \{(J,. given a m2re perspective, ani, if ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ ｮｯｬ ｾｹ deals ',Jith that i'lhi.ch is actnall.y ;J,iven, I cannO"l) go b("yond t: is and speak of tha\, vlhic 1 is not a . .: t.ually given i.e., ｴ｢ｾＭｩｴ ｐＩｴｮｾ of i:Jhich t1;:Ls is a p<?rspectiv"b On':! coul') go as fv.r as to SJy ｬ ｜ｊｨｾｬｴ I 8m actually ＺＬ ［ＱＮｖｾｃ nov.' irJ pr..u'c(lpti n is ｾ Ｎｳｬ､ｅＮｾ o:c' psrspective (aD ｉ ａｾＩｰ aran-::8 11 ) and even itlhen I sa.y thBt J ;::,creeive a stele o (-1?..Q.[lfL"t:·:).J.lZ. ('..-hen I attempt to speak of thDt \'Jl'i eh is app f3aring), r am going beyond Hbat I ｄｾｴ｜ｬＨＱｶ pel.'ceive11o ｩｾ･ must emphasize, becaus8 of the possibU it..: of misconstr'ing Husserl on this point, that what I am actually given in this pG,rce!'Jtion is, e.g., Y-i2..S.Qffee. Ｌ ｾ ｑ and not mere ly fl side 0 f ｴｊｾｪＮＲＭｓＰｦ ｦｾ･ ..Ｎｾｕｬﾣ .3a ying as r:usse j.' 1 does that i'ihar \ve are! a·t, 11 ally" givRn is only 8. 5i,,€: of this cup I ｷｯｵｬｾ take to be a ｰ･､｡ｧｯｾｩ｣ｬ device or abstraction by means of ;,}hi h be ｄＮ｣ｾｯｴｬＱｰ ｩｳｨｅＧｳ t.\",o t.'!ings. Fi.rst of 8.11, it allO'.vs nirr. ,0 indicate the inadequa":.o ＿ｩｶ･ｮ ･ｾｳ of trarJscendent objects ('.'1I";il;h l.S ir.mli.cit in ｾ｡ｹｩｮｧ II I perce i.ve this coffee ClJpll and is ｭｦＺＡＮ､ｾ exnlLctt in saying III peH:etvc C\ side of thts coffeo 2Up") • this 81so alloVis T-Tusserl to srw\v t!1e intent iOf!allty- of cO)J[.;ciousfJPSS vJh' eh ｮｾｯ･ｳ bryonrl" \,]h;:.[: is It a c: t.t w.ll y :. i v e nil. nis 1. S 8 0 f t. e r rr13 in t his C.'1 S (! Ｑｾ e fila ins eonfllsirtG, fOi' HC: are not actDQ1.ly givt:m a liside tt or' IIpe:rspec .-,ive" tIl p0rcept ion to ldhich an inb;ntional Ｎｳ･ｯｮ｣ｴＱｹｾ G Ｑｉ｛ｾｯｩｮｧ ' bpyond lt ｩＮｾ［ ｓｌＱｰＨ［Ｎｲ｡､ｾｊＰｲｬＮ (AS :d' thQ inteLLjonality of ｣ｯｮｳｾｪｯｵｳｬ ･ｊｳ in fjCH'cepttcr. \-iere sornohmJ avoio.8.bl:a). 'l'hn notion of ""ctLlally sivcn!t ｲＬ［ｵｾ ｴ ｴｨ･ＮｴＧ･ｦｯｾＧ･ be used I·Ji t. b c c:m t ion. 196 I., pp. 178. -. p pp u 30 • ' :.:.=_., 197 198 ＬＮｾｉ 199 1e pp. ＳＶｾ can see from this that naturRlism is a DUra expression of the r1atLll'al attitude i-J11L::h Ts c:onr(.,aled from itself. That js, naturCllism is that ｰｨｩｬＮｯｳ ｰｾｩ｣｡Ｑ system whish is most clRarly reprcsAntativ8 of a system based q:,on and ｣ｾＮＺ ｰｲ･ｳ ｩｶ･ of tl e 118tu1'31 ::ittitl1.de. ThB U.fIｱｵ･ｳｴＮｩｯｮ･ｾＱ ｾＩｬＧ･ＺＢＧＮｬｐＡＩｯｳｩｴ ｯｮｳ of the natural attiturlr:: ･ｭ ｲｾ･ as the "first principlAs lt of natuI'nlisrrl in thj.s manner. Naturalism takes for Ｓｲｾｮｴｾ､ the v-lidity of the worldapperception aud poses its questions solely on this be"is. The immediate obviousness of these first principles and our natur3t inclination to\·jards them g:Lves ns a clue as to \<I1'1y ｬｲ･ｳＧｾｕｈ vas so ｣ｯｮＨ［･ｲｮ･ｾｬ viith exposies the absu.rd i tie s of na tural ism in his 3 t' t. 1r1e liP)') i losophy as Ric:orous ,':kience ll • This also shoVJS 118 a ntul'Al progress on i1'1 Fusse:clls thou['.1-1t. Iils ｣ｯｮｾＧＲｲｮ \<lith salvagin:s ｬｯｧｩＮＧＺｾ｡ｬ objectivity from a ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬｇｩｾ interpretation in the ｫｾｩＺ ｅＡＩ ｉＡｊＮｙｾｕ ＳｦＮｾ ｴ ｩＮｏｬＡｓＮ lead hirr. to unearth t e philosOI)hical presup;:.ositions of th"'? ｣ｩｴＭＢＮｩｾ［ｯｬＮｲＧ｣ｹｳｪｾ tendency. This ｰｲｌｴＮｬｯｅ［ ｾＡＺＢｬｪＮ｣｡ｬ II'GSUpposi' ion is precisely ＡｬｑＮＱＢｊｗ［ｾＮ ｩＲｭＮ In the ｊ［ＡＮ Ｙ ＲＱｾ｡Ｎｌ ｊｮ｜ＮＺｦｌｳＮｾｪ ＸＮＨＩｴ ｪ＿Ｒ Ｌ Eusserl lmderminc;d psychoJ.osism by ｳｬＺｏ｜ｯＡｩＮｮｾ the sccptic'3.1 EiDsurdtties i"h5ch follow from it. In lIphilosopby as Ri::;orous 3c iG'JiCe lt , H 15se1'1 implieltly un:h'rmin8s psycholo:;is!f1 once Ｙｾ｡ｴｮ by uuJ.ermininz its philoso .tlical U[l':-} cll.'pi. nn ins: , iQe., naturalism" \'!e should n lso note in pass ins that the II anti-· natnl":'l.lism" of the tlFhilosophy as i{in:01'ous Science!l article is imuU.citl.y dil'G'0ted tm,wrds the It:cealism lt 0:( the ｌｯＨｾｩ｣ＲｊＮ ｉｬＱｙＮｳｾｴｩＺｲＮﾧｕ . 9ns; for herein, tn this laJ.:te_' "JOrk, Hus..:erl--stil.l nlB.llltai.nec.1 a belicf in t1Je real dL,tincU.on bet,,·]een the intentlonfl obje t and the real object whi2h exists "out the.re ll • Tl-:is realistic doctrirle is the last and most pO\'iE:l'fu1 VGstaf,8 of naturalism; ,\t is, ｇｳ ･ｮｴＮｩｾ ｌｹｾ the DE t ｕｽｾＮ｣ｴ 1-.3 t t ｩｾ ..w le • This last ",oint sh01:lS liS yet ,[lother ｾＱＸｶ･ＱＮｯｰｶ ment in E1l3serl l s thol);ht. ｾＧＡ･ S9'3 ta"" by ｢･ｦ［ｩｮ ｩｮｾ \1} i. t h n ｾ rj. t i_2lJ"9 .9J:.. -J!.:?::LQ.ＬＡ ｬﾧＮ ｩｾ ＹＱ Ｚ ｲ F us.s e t' 1 no. t 11' a II y GviderJt in mO,Jed to its !"JhiJo, 0lJhi::aJ. ｵｮｊ｣ｲｰｩｮＮｬ ｮｾＵ his 1a t Ｈｾ r ＮＺｾ r, j ［ｪＮ｟ｾＡﾣ 0 L..f' ﾷｬｉＺｊＮ ｬｾ <2L1,!"tQ • 'T b i. S 8 Ven' , LJ.q 1. 1. Y developed int CJ. C01Y.:l:L fOT'rtdllatloD of 'l;he essence of the nBturaU sUo::: ｙｾＧｮ･､ｲ Ｃｾ Ｍｾ XI,.....\ .... 1i ｾＭＡ i ,.: ;, p r ｾｙＢ 1 ｾ -1- e d ＭｾＩＮ i - 1) (.l j')_ ....0.u:-:._ ..,,!.:.!2.....,:.:..=._r_.':......:...: __ . ::c.:::-_, I C'_I!.,._.al> r, .J.. ｾｴ［Ｚ ｵｯＧｉｨｲ d .I. • tl'l8 Ｈﾷ｣ｉｙ ｾ･ ﾷＱ ＧｮＭＱＺＢｾＬ ('J -- \....... Ｍﾷ ｬ Ｚ｜ ｾ ｲ ［ • ［ｾﾷＬＺｌＮ th'?sis of "0:'....... ｾＧｔＳ \.-/ <> the ｓＧｊｾＬｰＨＡｮｳｴｯｮ of {-.his th?sj s by means of t 1'le ptHHiomerlolo:;icR1 ｲ ･ ､ ｵ ｣ ｾ Ｕ Ｐ ｮ Ｌ "'/e SAG th8 ratural fruition of a con .in lOllS line of' ､･ｶ ｬｯｰｭｴｾｮ Ｎ \'Ij th the I'eduction is ｳｬｊＮｾ Ｙｇｮ｣ｬｇ､ the ｴＸｮｻＱＮｅＢｾｮ｣ＢＷ of na.tura. i.sm as thereby is suspended thQ tAniency of ｰｳｹ｣ｨｯｬ ｾｩｳｭｯ Vli.S, \'iE' 81'e ｾＮｐＡＧＳ､ Ell,Yay from naturalis._'s DB.ive beli E!f in t:he exisJ:eDco of a vlOl'ld 'LrldeDcndel"lt of e""l'\prio",c"" ::l"''' 1'1-. l ·tllis ;J""'r lAar' ."'5 u. .ll. ｾｊ ｾ J \ " : . .',112 1 ('... ..L t::t .._ . I 0. J ....... t -1-,.... In..; ＬｾＡＮｊ l . . , ...; 'JO"lrl .; _t. \.l ｾｴ O l'r it is exper ｩ･ｮＨ［ ｾ､Ｎ ｏｮＭＺ Ｎｾ could ｓｾＮｙＬ tllerefol'e, lhf"),t He are lead (a.nd th is j fJd lea ｾＮＭＬＺ s a furt'heI' deve loprnent. 0 Hus s e1' 1 's t hOD ｾｨｴＩ to 1);(; ｊｾ･ bm?!l c) to ｔｨｬＧｯｌｊｾＢ ｬ J•..! 200 ｈｾ ＮＬ 20.1 Ｎ｟Ｌﾱｾ Tl';Q' ... ...., J.. , pr) r 0 202 cf' e note 204 ｾＮｕｃ ＱＲ ｾ ppo 07 0 /- / /0 0 31+. pp. 48-9. 205 ;§;[., pp. Ｓｾ _-_ _- 208 It is lor t"is [-':laSor.l th':1t I,he reduction Lilustue a. l.1.Ci'.f0I''',1.] .. ｲ･､ｬＢｉＬＮｾｴﾷＮｯｮ .... ｾｽｨ･ｬＡＮＨＧｭ･ｌｯｬ ｳｩＮ｣｡ｬ It is [jot ･ｮｯＬｬｾｨ .... individual thetic positings 'lith resp2::t to individual obj::..cts, for in t1lis c:as8, the 'vJo'ld is ::iti.1.1 ｰＭＬｾ｣Ｚｵｯｳ･､ in ｴｨ｡ｾＮＺ \'!8 sttll snp:.ose that it is an object in ｴｨｾ Horlj with r2ference to whjeh \ve are DGrforminr:: Ｌｾｬｩｳ ab.ster,ti ｮｾ '.'Fe see rathor that: Instead of t'-is ·.lfiheTs21 abstenion jn indivudl_l.a1 steps, a vm.pletcly 'ifrerGnt sort of [,ivers'.l epoche is rossible, namely, one which puts out of action, with ODe b:ow, the total performance running thl'OU3:h thC', \vho1e of natural \'Jorld-life acd thrOl;(;h ｴｨＨｾ ｜＾ｊｾ ｯｬ･ net\,)or::: •• ｾｯｦ vali.dities -'- ｰｲＸＧｾｩｳ･ｬｹ that tot,al perfOrffi:lnCe \'lhh.. h, ("1S the coherent l'n:::l.tl1.ral e II ") ''n"-' t ., II ::>.1..1d.!-' ｾ { 1 II t r ca {ＮｌＧＢＺｊｾ '", ....l.. f 0 _'f' .\'-..4 I ｾ t' d "1' ( Ｌ Ｎ ｟ ｾ ... R " .. t·· r::> 0,... ,l..}J 1 . .ｾ｛ＬＮ \..:;'" dｾ t"L l' ｾ ｬＮｾ｟ 'llr'l... pp;> 150). ＭＭ｟Ｎｾ｟ to merely absta n J.. ｦｲｯｾ '\., .• ｰ･ｲｦｯｾｩｮ r" '" 0 v ")\,,' .. I Tbe total v.lOrld-belief must be Pllt out of ｾＩＱｄＮｹＢ 111e sh2.11 come to see thr:; full relevD.nce of this be 10;" 'tlnen 'Ie see tha the not 10 nor hor i. zon li?a:1:; us to u.n·J. ｾＧ［ｲ S !:n n:-1 t .'J ｴＮｾ . . u is "believed eVGry parti.<:nlr:;r cb:j'2Cu. 'Iithin ｪＮｮｾＡ i Z (1 n 0 f ｾＭ he I!J 0 r 1-:1. 7.f 1,.i ｾｃ :10 no,., 11 II t 0 H " () f ［ﾷＺＡ ＮｲＭＺＧＡ Ｎｩｲ ｾ､ｴｹ '·JOrlJ-l.:;::.l.L.l.: ('.':hL:\' in f'1.r;t ,5ef:;,c2s ｾＩ［･ .he Ｑ［ｯｬＢｾ lj 11 ｾＢ .1-.. . i s of. .the ｰＧｈ ｾｩＧＮ［Ｚｬ ｌｴ Ｇ ｯｨｪ･ｾｴ i.n ＩｮｯｩｴｾＺ＼ＮｬｊＨ .3 ＧＮＱ｡ ｬ ﾷＨｩｴｾ｡Ｐ abstention \l)ith resp;:].::;t to an ob.ic,:::t 'dll abwys re::;t u;:.on 't.:-,t3 'v.'Ol'ld-belh,f ｛［｣ｾｩ ｰｲ･ＳＱ ｰｲｾｏＮﾷＧｾ it. :.'c ,::an rJo\'.' ｹＧＮｬ｟ｾｳ｡｣ ･ ［ｾ :,.;1';y :;.t is ｴｨｾ ｴ E J.s::;CI'J_ bel:LevBd ｴｨ｡ ﾷｾｊＮｌＺｾ phor.om:'Do •. O:'Y rC(1D.ire i::tn ＮＱ［ｩｴｾﾷｲＲ ｻｳＮｾｮＨ '1' '1 ", ,... f' 0 "..rn;' t i "rj n_ f ,.., J \-P.... 'JＮｾ Ｌｾｲ r, 11::-':.' ﾷｊＮＧＭ［ｾＢｬＺｲ .L ;>'_'.::"""':....;.••• !.:__ ... '1 {".J.. ....... _ 't..) '," \1 t· n \1ｪＮｾｦＢＭＺｲﾷＬ " u. I.. . '-> ':' ,-. ＧＺ｟ｾ Ｎ｟ｖｾ ｾ｟･ｴＮｊ｣ｪＡｾＬ､ｬｲｯｊＺ ＩｾＮ '"'1 r '.L l' r.; ." J'.. !Ll.1 ｨＺＬｩＩｾＡﾷ｜ + ') .J ＱＺﾷＡＧｾｶｲＲＢＺ t \. e l' j.• .., / : .. .:.:.1._"'.' (> •{' '. .... <3 • i ".:; j'I!:'1' 7..... ＡｾｃﾷＮ｜ＢＧ J}':"" •. , Ｇｾ･ｦｩｉ ｾｩｯｲＺ tiJ':; , " " , , . . -'. ＮｾＺ •• ", . .... '1 Ｇｾｴｬ ('hN](:'ver 1- J q ｣ＮＺｊ ｬＮＯＧｾＺＭＩＮｊＧ _J 1"J·"::'l.·, -L" t' ..... ' .. IT :A.LLc,j v(.:'\."·J.. l : ,. -. " 1 J·· '-c \.0 l' e'.; ｾ or, ｊ ｾ ｲ Ｇ Ｍ :'-, .-:.:.. ［ ｬ Ｂ ｾ ...:..::?_. "()J'l,i ＬｾＢＧ .. ;...:. .... ,.. ()!} f·l1':'>'1·' Iv k...... , __t"':..• __ ' .:::...=. e '-" .:...; ;:} . .' <::, v • Through 'cr-'c absterltinn \..ｊﾷｾ｣ｩｨｽ inllibits ＱＭ ｾ［ \'I1"ole hithc.c 0 ｄ｢ｾｯｬＨＢｮ ＧＢｾＺＮ of.' l.iff;3. co::-:}lA":'e tr::H't3format ion 0 f 3. 11 1 if € is 8. t :- cd r. e '.5, 3. tho l.' 0 It g Ii 1 y lj e \.} \.) a y ", .." . . 1 r:() ) ,r ( 02£, o f .Ll_eo p;?_ '.i-).I The ethical COGGot tions of ｴｾｩｳ are immanse. They show "l'O h-I;:-!!)"r>()l:',-l'j,-" "''-1p'-,or·)'''I-·olo·-'T ｾｬＬＮ Ｂ Ｇ･ ﾷｊ l j.....t v;, ""' " '-.-.... J _, t.o FI''-''''''''fll .... •..,., ......... ..-., ;:) .. ..... 1 . ., '- _ _ ..... c" .L ;::) the •. ... J_ '"tl' 0' 1- ｾ •.; ,..... (1 C t' (j·l(" .... r· -" i-"'{..ＬＮ ｉＢ ｾ '1 C i" ｾｲＩｅｬＺ r .." +'1 . . . ｾｬＬ 1'..., ""0 ｾ Ｚ［Ｎ !:!....':;•ＮＺＢＧ｟ＡＭｾ _._... ｾＮＬＺＧＡＢ ...ｾｊＮＺ Ｌ ｕ , ·.. l -:"" ) L ｾ L" ［Ｎｾ L, I ct \, Ｚｾ •..: ＢｊｾＳＮＱＨｽｮｦｴ or lIlo::>t in 1:1'1,3 ..ｾｬ､ ｲｷ but ｲｾｬＮｴＱＺｾ ｲ one \<ihj.ch 1 ｾ 17. e ｾＨＬ -r·'. i ,., 1. t L '. 1 '0 ｾ _,i n ! q ｾ i- ,",.....CJ I'l .1_, r 3." Ci ＨＬｾ ,•._ ..:> J,• l, co J.t, r /.1. ｾ -'.._.. . 0....., \, d ｾ i'-,, J. J' a. vC' hQ J' f' l-)"t' ＢｔｩＧ｜ｊｾＢ Ｇ［Ｂｈ ('r.J' ＧＬｾｨｩ J 1.....f'ot.:"O"-J "'I"J J v ..... , ｾ It. ''''''''.j. w.J, 1) w 1., "' ...'·'(" h(:lI'I' o. " \,'('".. ...'-C";"c, I' ., I . . {' , . , 11 ' ( , -,.., 1'7'" 'lunC·:'lor,aI'1.8S 0 ... ｾ｣ｮｬ､ＺｕＧ＼ｮｩ ｾＮ＿｟ Ｚ Ｎ ｜ ｾｰ .' ｽｾ ;·,o8 .... C(lrLaHHy r,,:.ilosOD 1:V bGco:nes an lleti',ical c(l,!.nj.. tiv8 ｾｬ｣ ｔＬ｡ｮ､ (Svllabus.I ::-··,I,',-,C' cJ··l·... ' . J . '-' ｾ｟ ._ .. ..... ｾＡ ..,1 ＮＺｾ ｾＡ '1 ti ｾＮＧＩ ｾ J... t) .L.. -'-' ｾ t J ｾ l C.J d _ I Ｎｊｾ ":." Jo." >;J" 1::"J •••J {-l .l.. 't ..... l. 1::1 t.1 .._ _ • , •_ 'w' Ｎｾ C, ""l -; ｾＮ .l- ... \ - <:,. pp. 23,... ....... 210 Compare 21 - '" ］Ｎｾ＼ｬＬ ,...,. B1., p. 213 cf. l.t pp. 21, 168 and asp., 247 ff. PP. 32. 5 :::f.1., 215 Ppb 86 and ::f. fl;. 5 pp. 33. pp" 13J.. 219 Thus \·13 Gms!.; ､ＺｌｳｴｩｮｲｾｮｩｳｬＺ bet"'Jeon ct!-, injet9t'minate substrate, a sub3tl'ate \,!l-ich :t'(:8S!1 no dei:.0rr:Jinatic.ns ｖＮｴ［Ｉｾ Ct.J 0" a t. ＨｾＬＮｲ C.0 \;.J.l'-:> "i 1/';' o -•. Ｌｾ -j rn"'Dl' I')]ｾＧＮ C\ _\.. d) ·1 " j... <.\..J.J , -""""""--_._-- r-'l ｾ PP • ...)ｾ ')" 214· ｬｾｊＮ • ｾﾷＬＢ ｴ v [ , \ . · , h 1'1",-1 . " ' Vr'Jf·" '.1 -'-'''1' 11'-4. ,,::> "8 J..1 I'hav ｴｮＺｾ of a 'o'iOrll"lt' vJh1 r:;h i ..:nplie;:; that thts ;-lOr1<-l has d.etcrminations, blJ.t Uw:;e have not as yet beell "explicitly-II Ｎｴｨｾｬｯｲ｢ forth or s11 0'11 n • ｾ｝ 220 222 224 ｾﾷ Ｒ t!.. .; . ＬＢｄｪＡＺＮ［ｾ T' . ｾ PP. 36 1 .I!2.i9.• 5- ｾ ｟ｬｐＭ T' . r1 226 ｉ｢ｩｾｬＮ 227 228 }: .J5.9.. 229 2 30 pp" 200. Lb i c1 .. ｾ pp ¢ 2 51+- 23 J. Ibid. 2]2 l£ii., pp. 278. pp. 13., 23 pp. 85. ."""f' v.i-' .. C', - I .2J< (;, pp • 33. 235 rT -- 236 19 1.cl.• 237 1.. , pp. 413" -t _. 233 &0) , pp. 82-3. ,-" -- 239 .W;;!,· , pp • 10. 2l.j-o :';11· , pp. 47. 2 LI-1 1 bicl. 2 1-2 ﾷｬｾＭｪｑｉ ) r)p· 50. 2 Lf3 .§..[. , pp. 33 . 55. I., ＲＱｾＩＫ pp. 102. 2 1.5' 'T ""f 2Yb ｾＮＱｩ｢ｉ 24·7 .f!!;L • , P:J· 33 • pp • ｾＮｾ PP. 49. 21·8 c P ｾ . ｲｾｊ _ .... _ , 2 l+9 r 1 " .. ｾｊＮＺ ｾ 250 IF) d. 251 ｆｦＱ ｾＮ ｾ C ｾＮＧ l06. .. f " PI) ｾ l,J' 44 PiJo 3"> L. ｾ ｰｾ f) .-.J •. < 270. ｾＮＬ Ｎ［ＺＬｾＭＲ ()' ｏｬｾＭｏ［Ｉ PPo 2'19. 252 pT., 2 ')r::'5 \.(0 'T) (> 110 and osp., 176 and also ') 2-' ./r:'h'" 2 ｾＷ .J .. ' . , .:-LOlg,. . "14'-t-J.. 1 I. 1)' r.; pp. -+ . . < I 253 .EJ.) pp. 48.0 2 )ｾ )C> 2()'l JT"" ＭＺＮ Ｇｾ c ｾ p • 1').J 1.1' o. 0 18 L p'O.... -1.7 v.... 'WQ ｾＮＬ ]) • pp. 266 IbiQ.. 267 cf. 268 1.., 269 ＮＺＰＲＱＭＮＧｾ TJ '-'l Jbii., pp. 233 pp. 54 9; fnt. 1. I., 270 I!2.id. 272 yrrT.::<, pp c 273··274. Italics mine < ｰｾ 273 pL., ＲＶｾ Italics mine. pp. 31.· 275 IJ:!J2.• , ppa ｃＢｾ '"'791-T .... ｾＧＺｾＮ 283 'rt l)P , Tj'ft1, 1)'1 1 -'.. t). 232. ｐ ＼ｾ ｾＮＩ ｾ . " 28 Lt ｾｄｬ｟l' ｑＮ ? pp. 236. l' . 0" • 285 ...:.£..1 , pp. 250. 286 PL. , pp. ｾＳＲ 3 & ｃｈｨｐｔＲＺｾｴ ｆｏｾＩｒ 'r!w ＨｾｉＧｬ･ｳｴｩＰｮ 287 I fcol, in fact .\. r lJ r" l..... O U.t.J 'r11' ｾ l " ｾＧｶＮｌＮ ;:, ,7,'J . - of ｲＮＱＧ Ｚ ｴｪＡＮ｣ＨＩｮ､ｓ｛ｬｃｾＱ _----_._------ ..｟Ｍ ｾＭ ｟ＮＬＭ ｾ l' 1.J I' t· . th9t ｾ ｵ ｳ ･ ｲ ｬ ｣ ri " ","-'n that bis '':2'1'10;:1 eSG?pes "'r n.,.J co 11'("' ｾ 0 - 'j' ·1 0 c ,..,..;:" 1.,1 1-' •.· •• :> '''''1. 1.-. 1'" ll:') .! ＧＭＩＨｏ＾Ｑ ｬ Ｂ ＧｾＱ Ｑ Ｎ ｾ 1-t 1 )' .:J (. ｾＧＺ｜ ＨＡ )\,.." ｾＶ ＺＮｾＬＢ '(,()<"-'1' 1)1,,> J..- _ ,_ ;,) J ...... y\ J'oJ '[N,I"E::>r, • i::.1..\. .•:> ' ••.• method (the redu tion) ( •..":' " 'j () .Ll.... ..., C n) to, !.... tl <.. p .1Jt.. '" .l..[1,-, __ .1\..\.__ crit.i..r'i;;rr,s lcnJ':!led ｾ｣Ｚ［｡ｪＮｲｊｳｴ l' T r' 1",...., J.. • • (') P e ... 1 h. 1.1 ｟ＺｬＮＬＭ ＮＬｾ 'r:· L c I."::D.,, 1"" ,.. .!.""':!vJ..... " 'I· .; Q' rJ ｾｽＮ ｌ Ｂ £'1 t ...... ｾＧＱＭｬｲＬ • (.1 . . ..J\......L ....... '.:)"-""1' .t\.. ｾ "'1' Ｂ Ｗ ･ ［ Ｇ Ｌ Ｈ Ｇ ｣ ｾ'J 1 . __",' I- J I) ｾ ｢ ｏ Ｇ Ｚ Ｈ ｬ ｊＮｾ of.. ｾ＾Ｎ ＬｖＢＭＬｾｊ J •• ) ...... crittcisn:ts. .sa:l n'l i.n 0 lE' 11T"':::t O)U-: 'T' leT t h;:l tit. is ｰｬＧ･ｾ［ｩｳ･ｬｹ a ､ｾＺｲＬＱｬＨ of .3cicn l ;·8 tl.1'1t ＡＮＧ･｣ｾｵｩｬＧ ＿ｓ of ｾｊＧｨｏｦＬｯｾ Ｇｳｮｯﾭ ｬｯｾ［ｹ tilc"it it be a ｬＩ［ＧｽｪｵＬｓｏｉＢｾＺｙ of ｉＢｑｴＺＱＹｮＲ ｃｾＳＮ ltS '..ｽｾｊ sai''l, any ('l] {" l·! ,',:J l,' ·.d 1 t ｾＮＬ')'ｾＬｯｬＧ niL. '. ｾ " l'..'(',' '. n . . . \ i 1 :': . . . ."" 0 r .'.hI ,1') ,ＮｊＧｾ ' I . J.- ｾｊ I 1--'{1 ---\1.." ., 1 1_ ,ｾ -c.......f' - ｾ " 1--' .) c ｟ＮＧｾ • l ..'. .. _ 0. ;.1 501-1j of ｉｭｾＮＺ ｲＬ Ｚｾｲ［｣ｻＳＮ ｬｾ･ Ｇ＿ｩｮ \'1(; [iOV:] U" t --'.lS-.2t'lts 9qn.ation 'Ii e llil'if; ('"< r""": , .... C,) , •• ,.J of ｴｾＱｃ ｾ｡ｴｬ ｲ･ Ｌｓｾｩｃｲｬｃｓ ｾｰｬＩ｣ｲｾｯ ｮ･Ｚｾｬｯ ［ｾｲ r;I::,,,,niI1'-' •• ".' ' J•• _ ..... 4 _ _' ｯｳ ｩｬＮＩｪ ｾｬｴｹ "litl) ｾｲｬ･ ＺｾＮＧｊ QLl ｇ ｃ ｾ Ｓ ｾ ｩ ｴ ｹ ｲＺＮ ｩｴ ｌｬｾＱＳ ＳｾｩｃＱＺ i ",. 1'8 ":::iLL: ｾＬＺＧｃ J Ｎｾ \.. ｾ .,........ ｡ｲ ｾ ＺｽＧ Ｂ ｬＩｾ ｩｓ or ·";-.-rnr·... 1 .. ...,. ., "f r . 1 () ｾ of\ 2 rj.zcrOJS ｉｾＧｃｊＰＮＢＬＺｪｬ ｾＮ ｴｬＭＧＺＱ haps -,Ie :;'-ol'ld ha':e +':["J'l v ... •. Iv r"'\ I..L ＫＧＬ ＭＺ ﾷｾｴ ns Ｂ ｾＭＧ＾Ｑ '" ,;., """ .... i ｴ･［ＺｰＸｲ･ｾＱ (i{' l: l , C') .. \..... ·,,1·,"1.'- \ . . . . 1 . ....... ＿Ｚﾷｾ ･Ｓ Ｑｊ ＨＺｴ ｬｌｾＮ Ｚｬｾ ｾ｟ ＱＺＨＳ .. Ｍﾷｾ of i_c s.r.:t.:l c::}r,tr£J.l ;-""1 ＧｾｊＬｬｯｲＯＭｉＧｬ ! . . '''0 ＢＧｾｬ .ｃＧｾ ｲＧ "pr>_• J i,.,. .. ) L r -' .. that comment E:lnd said rel·.hs!..' :.;:.l. _ 3 ,:\ "rF' .... '.; ＮＺ ｊｾＮ . .. " J ... ＧｲＬ｣ｪＺｾ , . I. .l • .. r;C'-;-11'''' 1.... J rO'·1 ... J ,,_ _.J< '-' ..... _ -J p..... 4 "1-J,) ('. ｾ .:.. C'") ｾｨ .L. , _ 1. J. <" 'J vihicb craI)::;,:eujed t ;L'lt u8m:;rd l'c:::;:;_::'rlcd ｭﾷＬＧｏｮｾＯｲＮｊｬ to ｆｵｳ ･ｲＺ｟ｾ ::'!1 (Jt:t.r ｾｬｉＱＮＰｲｊＧｾＢｉｃ ｴｾｬＺ｣ ﾷ Ｑｾｴ ｳ［Ｓ･ＡＧ s re·01 ｾＱＺｊ 3031 of ｓｾｩ ｮ｣ ｏｴＱｾ･ ·the ｾｃ､ＡｬＺｴｩｯｮ had "t.. J.;'3 r':. Ｑｾ［ｩｊＭＱＺＮ｣ _Ii t1'1';; ｲｾｴ｟ＮＲＧ Ｚ［ ｾｴｬ｜ｩｲＮＱ a1'}.(1 ＷｊＮｴｩｬ｡｣ｾ､Ｎｲ ＭＺｾ ｴ t1"je ＱｾＮ ｩ［ＺＧ｣ｬＩＨＡｲＲｉ＼｣ｲ･ＺＢｬＩｲ roj.t)_ ..Ｎｬｲｯｩｾ J'r18 g03.1 <lnd the ｩＺ［ＮｾＩＹ ｳ ｩｯｊｪＨＬｾ､ ｦｃＧ､Ｎｴｾ ｩｲｾ :=-ca,'3on held ｾｶ "''''1' !·"'t c) .:J +1-'·:.t-'-l 't,.-j,r">r'o i-"Cl Ｌﾷｾ ＢＺ ｲｰ ｅ '7Cll ｬｲ＾ＺＬＢＮ｛ｾｨＧＢ , l.:l l::> .......... 1·)·:;1 !".,(..\, _•• ..,;,.1. Ｎ ＭＧ｟Ｎｾ ..1.\';;;.,.)>",.., ＱI'ot Ｎｾ . . ., ..... 1.\ .... ｾ <; ........ ｮｬｾｴｩｲ［Ｎ｛Ｑ＼ 1.,t e ｪＮｮｳｴｩ･ｾｴｩｯｇ beerJ ･ＮｦＺｾ｣ｴ Ｑ ＮＵｾＲｴ ･ｦ ｾ ｳＳＰ［Ｈ Ｇｬｲ of ［Ｓ｣ｩ･ｮﾷＮｾ｣ ｬ ＭＺｲＢ＼ｾＧＺ Ｇ ｆｉ or .. LI.U'J\.:.._ v·", ""'..-_ <"..; c·5. n by of tne ｬｩ｢ｴＧｅｩＲＱｾ･ ｲ｡､ｩ｣｡ｬｩｾｹ toilS ｲ･､ｵｾｴｩｯｮ J __ '-, ..... r0duction. :;us:3f:>rl f'orfc.i.ted the ｦｾ Ｐ ｲ in ofJcience. Perhaps it '\'iill be discove.'.'Gd throlJ.;:- f({/"G!l':;1.' study thp.t evsr: i,-.be ｬ｡｣ｪｾｯＮｊ ｌ･Ｌｲ ｯｊ ｣ｨＰＺ ｮｯｩｴﾷＭｾＺ ､･ＧＱＮ 3.. ::Je ｾ｣Ｎ｜［･ ='hnract<3ri.ZE';c1. it, J.'!,l.ns i.:-·to d5.ff'J.cll.lties. ｩｾ can fot:'scc tJ'c' l:;ossibil.it:l of ＺＳ･Ｎｹｾ｟ＢＧ［Ｚ ｴＮ［ＢｾｩＮｴ only in vi '3':,1 cf Cl fr.d.t.:, in th'3 [ossibilit; 0; ｓ ｣ ｩ ･ ｮ ｾ ｇ can one ｾ｡ｩｮｴ｡ｩｮ that e ｣ｯｾｰｬｴ･ rnrl..j ... ·riovJ ｾＧｏ ｴＭｬＺＨｾ ,·.:::> .... 0<.;<,1· ....... --'0..... .... is _ '_...r,os::;j . b1_(.l • PD1'11,sns •.. . • _ .'_ ｮ･＿ｾ＾Ｚｴ .... hoIdi.'-,r, _ '. ,. , 0..... () :"j"Jl••", "'1 ", I t. ,.... p )' :') ,;} l'-,_,.,t._ n ｾＮ '1 0 r-1 (l 0 0' j • '" t::: ..... 1 J_":,:) 1-' N r h.C...... T 0 j'J ,-:In Ll :')1__ ｾＭ ·1- l.., ? " n ,-".1. \ . 0 ·.... ........... iJ ...... O f <.:.t. 0 ; ｾ ｾ ｾ ｾ Ｎ Ｎ＿ｾ D ;:J J . '- :. _ ｾ｟ＮＺＭ ..... ｟ ｾ ':1 IJ V\:;: l':?,Ull:;tiOfJ). is ｩｴｅ［ ｾｬｦ a ｾＺｬ･ｭｊＮｮｲ of ［ｊ｣ｩＲｲｊ｣Ｇ ｾ have said l!! our ｉｦＺｔ ｜ｃｄＱｩＺｾｔ ｃＬｲ tt1a.t F 1lSS9 '1 did not l'et:lai.n tr·lle. to the r.J.:li:'ality of the pic'duction, ｃ ｣ｈｬｾ＾･ of l-;is .f9.i.th J.n ::kiG.fJ88o 1.3I'h::tflS it is j'st. t 1"11s f::J.J.th l.rl ｓｃｩＨｾｄ ･ tlla:; ':lei'1al':d.' 8 ra:::li.cal, co:nplete ｲ･｣ＵＮＱｊｾｩＺ ｯｮＮ a ｣Ｈ＾ｲｮｾＧｬＩｴ･ Toll,:; ＩＧ＼1ｾ ｩｬｲ Ｇ !a " ('c .. .... n:on(l1:1t:'1'to'LoL'V ｯＮＧｾ Ｍ ｾＧＭ ＭＢ ＭＧＭ ｟ＮＭＮＡＢ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ＢＭＢＮ｟Ｍ Ｍ 1 '3 sse [:. ,'.1 :-li. c h 1'1 Ｑｾ＾Ｚｲ ...... -"orit -·:c _..1..... ' . )H ｾ ＱＭＧＺＮＩｉ ｾ Ｘｮｴ Ｎｩ ｣Ｌ t h ':' r sa '? ［ｾＩｬＺ l: i. 0 n of a compl:::L,G reuu2tion 0 ｨｾ ., _ S _,tIle Hr::rr>fa .... . _ ,__• .,:1 ... "T'r;e most im' rtan': ｬＧｾ｜ , ｾ I'S , t?::J. r; 1; 2::) i.l sis thE imp 0 3 S :L h iii Y J tl (Fre.:!:...? .::g"., pp. xiv). The rec lizat.'on of the ｌＧＺ ｢ｅｾｲｬ［ＩｾＧｩ｜ ｬｴ ｩｾ ?u.sse.rl's ':::risis is r,othL.-:.; other ｴｬｾ｡ｲ the r;i.a 1 ｉｺｾ［Ｍｴｯｮ of' II the ｕｬ［ｾＧｔｉｏＺＬ i Vi:: t.':?d ＩｾｲｮｳｬＺＮｊＱ of the \oJOrld tl (Ibid., pp. xiv). It is Un's that, ｩ＾ｬｾ･ｮ Ilfreed!! froD the OVf;I'l'idi.r,::; ｾＱ･ｲｮＸｊ､ｳ of Science, the ｲｬｾ､ ｬ｣ｴＮｪ ｯｮ becomes s ｉｦＭｬｩｴｮｾ ｢ｹｲｳｶＲ｡ｬｩｮｾ the limits of r0"lcctive ·t'[)Ol,:;r'ntT t......... 1"'!is ,.....it is tl-llS t 1v,i- ｴｾ･ rer'll"ti,'tl bLl'-'Q os t 1° . e v . central and decisive ｦ｡ｾｴｯｲ ｩＮｾ the lealization of its own ｾ｢ 0 t, _ . U • oJ • I . _ ..... ｾ ｾＢ Ｎ Ｎ t ｾ｜Ｎ '>J \...1 ," ... ｬｩｭｴｯｾＺｮｳＮ ＱﾷＺ･ｲｬｾＲｩｊＮＭｏｙ ｩｾｯ･ｳ on ,:0 S:.iy ｊＮＨｾ｡ＢＮＺ Far fro:-n lJein("t, 2$ rws 00:->11 ti-!O!l.:ht."I a 'procgedure Ｎｾ ,.J. ｾ ｰ｢･ｲＬｯｭＲｲｯｬ ｾＺｌ Ｚ ｬ ""nl'lr)'"()' .: " ._ '- . ) ｾ !.' ｾ Ｂｾ'1 re:J.l1c"ion C' ---!-nri"'" 1 ('P-)l'j lJe. "rr:'c1..) " ". \ +.'......_. , p', .I,..Yl'vr) c .. I ar;i sUJ.'e that at t:us f01nt., ＬｾｴＩＺ［ｾ Ｇｄｲ L '1,..}ol1.ld ＱｾｬｳｮｯｲＺ ｳ I'e8',;t. Ie a ｣ｯＡｾＬｰｬｴ ＩＮﾷｲＭ､ｵ｣ｾＬｩｯｮ is in ｰｬＢｩｬｊｾｩｰｌｊ not ｾＺｯＮｳ ｈＩｬｯ the ｡ｴ ｩＮＡＧｾｲ［Ｌ･ｮｴ o.C the S': hr.:l':o ofuhc'nortl('!t":o'Lo,ti,:;al Imrm·HJenco ｲＢＨｾ ｾ -"'1 ＨＢｬＮｾ t ｾＧｏ ""Ii:I • ,.: • (4<' .- ... -1 ｾ ,",(.),1S r,ot. .. 0,"')1.( ,- 1 J.O!. '.. ,1.'. oIJ..,n ,:0.1.,,,l :J.IJ 8JF,1.J,:.>1I.Jn, ｯｮｾＮｉ ｖ (ltl"O1I ｾ＾ｬ｣Ｎｏ a,-]'rl":' .... 1I,]ep·<>I-,r1'Jl,·c·c; or-). '\"I"""'!' .... '[1)·,-.·1·\ ＺｲｬＩｾｦ ]O :ty ""'j:.l outs ide il:.s sco!'e; as ·ferleaq .. ;'- OILy l':UCS it II. • e r<td iCed. ｲＨｏＩｦｬ･ｾ U.Ol1 a!!'!oiJ.r!t s to Q conse iOIJ.sne s s of its 0\-1 n dep2n"l" (."" ClJ-J a·' Ill"I"·-'1'·'.LC'-C'·l'·'0 l'ire> It ( .... ':'C]'-:)V('C) ,\) .i. l·J·d) J _ t1.• .:. d Co.1 1n l·'·..L"') Jt"0';'j1 10" "'l'r,'h r" -'1""1' r.>rr'!oi!f,t.). i·t rr\'1,·'i-;o·n ':;f l' "' ...'ep{;\"\C ..... (.. _ . ｾ｜ Ｎ ｊ ＢｾＧＺ Ｂ Ｇ Ｚ｟ｾ ＮＬＺＧｾ Ｎ ＧＢＺ o._J ＮｊＧＭ Ｚ ｪＮＯｾＬＢ and autorlOL'1')I1.:; ＮＳｰｨ･ｲｾＧＳＬ ",'hich perl,aps '.lr'r'lJ5 on p:ccref10ctiv0 ｬＺｩＮｦ ｾ as the ｉｬｾ［ｯｵｲｮ･ｬｩ of th::;'na fer ｾＩ｣ｩＸｮｴｩｦ ｣ explicat.ion, ｾｴ the_8 expl.icatioDs carry Yithin themselves their own "sour.c311 of ｪｴｊＢＩｴｩｾｪ . ·'i3ti,}r!6 !<2rlea.l- )onty ·t8t-<:r.S iius:;er lis ｶｩ｣Ｑ［ｬｩｮｾ of hi i.self ;':.21 2l ｬＮｊｃＱｴ･ｲｾＱＲＧｰｬｴ ｬ ｾｴＭ ｲｊ Ｎｪｧ｣｢ tn ShOl'} that Husserl im01icitlv b01ieved in the ｩｾｵｯｳ ｩ｢ ｬｩｴｶ of a comple La rt?duct..ioD (LQ.:_2.<). ＡＺｾＩ believe t1'1.::.-t if tilLs ｜ＬｽＨｾｲｰ the case, 'vIe 1;]0I,1d bi1vO to SCl.Y tha.t EU.3;;cr1 implicitly believed in ｴｨｾ impossibility of 8cienc8 o Oc trleaJ. sti·::; I,hilo:.iOI.Jly, J .; 'J .' .... ..:,.. ...:' "r lill"') .' J J ,f • ., .,1 0 \.A.. ....... ｾ fJ jj VI..-'. (lV< .:,.\."- ,- " ) ........ _ .L.. • ...) 1 ..,0 I Ｌｾ \::. .'. .-::, \ .... , .... \:' .. &;.);\..... . ｾ r. 6 ,:''1 { •." •• • ｾ Jc,.,t ｾ ,;,.(.,:)L v ｾ v " J.. 0 v -.J \'r '-J _,-"" • ,",-to- . . . . . . . . . . ... ;:. .l;' •.J.. .... y 28e Heroin vie :lri1ply our E1Cr;(=;ptansc:! of Husserl. I s vieiving ObIJJ.101nC;[loloC;y 23 the consummation of the Idea of ｰｨｩｬｯｾＺｗ ｪＱｲｹ ::is such. ｅｬｊＮｳ ･Ｎｾｬ t.ruly repres(!nted F<9.t.Lonalisr'j c::ll''''i''3d to its ｬｯＧｾｌＺ ｡ｬ con·:;lu.=;i.on (i.n fa :t, He slimy ifi our ｮ Ｇ ｔ ｾ ｏ ﾭ mr.TICJ' th8.t ｾ［ｵｳ ･Ｎｲｊ Ｚ ｡ｲ ｩＨＡ､ it be"ol--.d its ｬｯＧｾｊＮＧＺ｡ｬ ,;on｣ｬｱｾｴｯＮｮ j.nto U·.$ r,e lfn·de ｾｲ［ｮｨｾｴ ion ｾ a1 i>o'J.:?;h ｾ･ｦＳｬＱＺＮＭｃｩｴ ｨＨｾ was lJnaHB.1'8 th2 t t.:lis had ｯ｣ｾ nred --- nerba. s, to do mo"s ju.:::;tice to ED,sse!'l i.r:.sie;bt, He ｬＧｾ ｩｏ｣ ＯＺＳｾＮ that he was aware that this was occuring and simply ｪ ｩ ｾ not want it to o:;-:ur). Ru_sscl'l. ｴｨ｣ｬＧ･ｦｯｾ sets his pllcrloroenolo:;y in a ､ｩｳｴｾｶ･ re13tion to the htstory of Ｒ Ｙ ｴ ｩ ｯ ｮ ｾ ｬ ｩ ｳ ｾ Ｎ Her bert :::; u2 ｩｾｊ e 1 ｢･ｬＧＡｾ in che text ｲＺｾｨ e ｲ｢ｬＧ＿ｊＮｏｾｩ･ no 10:-"1. ea 1 flO' T ｾ 'TI e " .' J'1,.,;:; ｾ I l' .." '-,[, 0 J'" r , ｾＱＧ h r.> r"o."U'V, ｾＺＷＧ［Ｍ -"-1-ＱＭＧｯｊｩＺｾｮ＿ / 1 __ , ,ＡＮＺ｟ｾＮ ＲＮ Ａ Ｚ｟Ｑｾ ,.",-,.ｾ +-v.L L..) cit.es a revG111inr; pD.ssa·e :if, a letter \'!1:it,-tc:n by j:usserl :i.CJ 1935. 1=e sees his prenornerlolo':;y 8.S: • " ｾ｡ met.hod b:) v]hich I l/!ant to establish ｡ｾ ｩｮｳｴ my::,ti .. isP1 and 1r1'2.tiol'l3.1isJl1 a i{ifld of Ｓ｜ＮｰｾｲＭ ationali.sr (libert';=:) :.-LQ.fJ3. jJ:TIllS) lti'ni.:h trnn::; ef,ds the old l'atione.liSEi as ｩｮ｡ｾｪＮ･ﾷｾｵ･ＮＺｾ･ and y''!t ｶｩＮｮ､ｩｾ｡ ･ｳ its inr::.ost objectives. (Plio 34). Husser1 ｴｨ･ｬＧＨＭＡｦｯｉＧｔＮＺｾ vi-2"vS :lis pherJomenolosY a3 t11C ｈｮｯｩｴＱｾｶｬ｡ｳＢ of rati2naltsrn as Idea. cf. note 289 below. J- '(" '"::l 11 .) .'. 'V ,-,!ishes to ｳＳＮｊ ｶ｡ｾ･ Rationalism as 1j09. from its manifestations and naive self-interpretations i.n ｴｨｅＧｾ 13t'1 nncl 19th centuries. The object.ions ra:.i.se'l ｡ｾ［ ins I: his phenomeno ｬｯＬｾｹ be ｩｮｾ a mere r e '" ur g!-lr.c e 0 f 289 ｩｮ｡､･ｱｵＳＮｾｄ 1-:u3381'1 " ｬｩｮｴＸＱＨｾｊ｡ sf,obbi-sm" ＨＮＧｾｲ Ｂ ｰｾ ＲＸＹｾＲＹＰＩ r,iT'/e ｊｅ［ｾｩｲ s claim t\;at H is not I'9-ttorIJlislil as ｳｬｩ Ｎｾｨ \'11'1 ic ') is a t rani t ｾ ｢ｵｾ 1'3. thaI' a misgL Lied rat iODal ism. ｅｕＳｾ［･ｲｬ to He staLes: I too am cert,a j fJ that the ;:;;U1' () nC';an c:ei s 1_s he s i t.s :coots in 3. !r:isgIJided ｲ｡ｴｊＮｯｮ｡ｬｩｾ［ｭＮ Bltt vl,:-! ml1.sr. not ta!{e ｴｾＧｬｩｳ to rIlpan tlJ&t ｲＸＮｖｾｯｬＧ ｡ｬｩｴｹ as SUC l1 }.2. evil or ｴｾ｡ｴ it is of only subo1'dina'e Ｕｩﾣｮｩｾ ｣｡ｮ｣･ for mank.i.nd IS flX:i.S ':e!l2G as a Hho:' G. Jationality in the_t high and ｾ･ｮｵｩｮ･ sense of ｾｨｩ h a]oGG we are speaking the primoridal '}roek ｳＧｾＡｲｊＳ･ \'Jhich in tbe cla::>.sici11 period of Jreek ｾＬｨｩｬｯＮｳ ｽＡＧＺ ｹ had become an i18a1, still requires to be ＬＧＺｴｲｬｾＩ E!Jch cl,HifJcatio[l, throngh self-rp.flecti.oY ｾ bl;.-t it U:; (;<:tlleJ in its lO8.ture form to gUide ollr ､･ｾＺＧ ｬｯｰｮＺ･ ｴＮ (';"':;"., P}1¥ 290)" The crj.sis of Europe3rls Cctence is not there Core a ::;r isis \'Ihj,ch hns its roots j.n ratioflalism T&r. .§£,., but it l'8.tl'9r has its roots in ｲＳｾｩｯｮ｡ｬｩｳｲｮ ｾｩｳｲ･ｰｲ･ｳ｣ｮｾＸｴｩｯｮｳ of itself in naturAlism and ｯ ｢ ｪ Ｙ ｾ ｴ ｩ ｶ ｳ ｭ whj.ch both naturalize consciousness and thereWith, ｡｣ｾｯｲ､ｩｮｧ to Husserl, deny the possibility of ｡ｾｴ｡ｩｲｪｩｮｳ neal1i.ngf'ulf:\ 11SS ｃ ｾ Ｒ Ｎ Ｌ pp& 297). 290 Ｍｉｾ pp. .')-:>8' j • ｾＬ Ｙｾ 5 291 fi· 5 pp. 131- CU· , pp. 155. 293 Y_il.Si., pp" 391.1-. 292 For a COlt p!1J' Lson of hm,] Hus..::>crl l s attitudu towards his ｰｨ･ｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹ cbanted through the years. It moved from his cl03!r.atic statements in t .9 Freiburg Lecture, ｷ｢･ｲ ｩｾ he states that ｰｨＸｮｯｭ･ｮｯｬ ｾｹ \-lil1 ensily ". .overcome all ｲｇｾ［ｩＮ ［ｴＸＮｮ｣･ and st.1rpidi.tyl! (pp . . 18" t.o many 0. the statements :Ln the ｾｬＧｩｳＮｴｾ vhere ho speaks of his passioned need for ｰｨＹｮｯｭ･ｾｯｬ Ｓｙ and his d ,site to believe in its posstbility Lf ｾ ＺＭＧ ｾＮＬ ppe (j 1'1. 296, 394). 2. 5 CI·1., :pp. 8. 296 Ibi1.. Italics mine. 297 IbJ.sl., pp. 151. 298 ｔｨｲｯｵｾｨ the revalation of transcendental subjectivity, El1sserl i'elt t\"]-?t the sciel:_l2s gained a univer,:>al arid unitary ｾｲｯｵｮ､ｩｮｧＮ nll the sciences, in fact, all moments . c ... ; Ｌｾ :> -I' 1 -:- '.- j' 1 't .. 'l'"'d' r 1":> • , -'. 1 04f' ｃｏｬｪＰ｜Ｎ ｾ｟ｏｴ ..... _1 1'" e, a.Le U_l-..!-.{l)v8._y '.,rOLD, I:. _ 111 ｡ｃｪｲ･ＮｊＧｬｲｃｾｶｪ ｡ｲＮｉ }1 sllbjecti_vi y. P.usserl, in his j'·ol:}]gl._i-lfJd, ｔＺｬＧＭ＿ＡＮｊｳ＼［Ｘｦ､ｾＲｴＹＱ L C statAS: The emanci.p2,tGd special scienr:es fail to nTlderstand the es 59 nt 5.al 011e- SJ,dedl1!:!ss of the i1' prodllcti011S; t.he)' fail to \1r,jersta r ::i that tbfJ.V ·,'Jill r,ot encompacs in their theories the full ｢ ･ ｩ ｮ ｾ Ｍ ｳ ｣ ｮ ｳ ･ of their respective provicnes until they lay aside the blind2rs inri,ose:1 by t:lcir f:1ethod, o,s o.,lJ inevitable ｣ｯｮｳ･ｱｵ｣ｮｾＺ ｾ of th8 QxcllJsive focusj DC of 8D.ch on j ｴｾＺ＾ own particlJlar' ｰｉＧｯｶｩ｣ｲＮ｜ｴｾ［ in other 'lords until they relCJte the ir :ombined J:'(->se:u':;('9S to" • ｴＩＱＨｾ ｷｩｶ｣ｲｾＢ sality of bei.lj:!. an'] il:,s flwdamental ess'3nt"al un" t y. ＨＬｾＢｔＧ L., PP <> ＩＮｾ ｾ･ｲｯｦ･ｲ ｨｔ ﾷ ｾｴｩｉＧ｜ referoncc to phonort1onolo;;;y and its J'elati.on to tbe seierl\;GS, IIuss 3rl s.,aces: ¢ t The Ｎｑ ［Ｚ ｾ Ｎｺｊ ｬ ｩ｟ｾ ｊＺ Ｍｩ R:ives ,_1.1'1. llf,Y :l IS:.-·tJ. ｟ｽＺｾ｣ Ｍ｟Ｎ｟ＮｾＭ ＭＭｾ｟Ｎ｟ ｊｾＧｬ ,! Ｇｾｯ Ｇ［ｲｾｻｬ ｴ J "(' ｳｾｊｌｽＮＺｲ +"''-'1' L· ,. '.' ............ ｟Ｎ｟Ｍ ｾ ｩｲＮＺ ｚ ＭＲＮ｛ＳＱｬ｟ｾ Ｎｾ Ｍ Ｇ［ ｴｬ ｛ｮ : ＢＧＳｲﾷｾＨＱ ｴｬＢ ｌｳ｣ｩｾＲＮ __Q[ ｾ _T".L{lf... LQ..ｾ､ＮＺｊＩＨ ,j, ｾ on'J'T ...'-111':'1'''' :::.-..::::.,"'-:=.-..:.:..::....._::.::.!,..;....: t.lOT"'lc' '" ｾ u nJ: ... Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ Ｍ ＭＮ ＮＭ ｟Ｎｾ｟ -_ _ __ ..of r, ＭｊＺＧＮｾｦ 0"±_ ＢｾＧｲＮＧＺｬＨｾｯＢｲ ｬＺＮ ＺＮ ｟ｾ ;:I ｾｬ ｪ ｩﾧ ... $ (t cons, 'j,'ruter} .... c 1- i'J t!:.2 ＭｾＭ ｾＭ Ｍ Ｍ 4 •ＮＡ［ＭｾＬＧ｟ｌ r,"r>. acj:,mLL?J:(l ＧｾｯｲＡＮｬ 5.ri!,,_f:; ｾ 5. '! D.Q..;l: ard par tic \l1.?.r. • • 3 c:L en':::: G S aro ｯｮｬｾｻ nor, ..,,<,elfsLlfficicllt members "liLbin it$ Ｈｌ＼ＧｬｾｌＮ ｾ pp. 272) ｾ The special sciences arc blinded ｴｾ the horizons of their 8,::;Uvitios'j for theY' ar3 Ｈｾｸ｣ｬＡＱｳｩｶ･ｬｹ dire,;tsd to"lards ｏｨｪｾＳ｣ｴｓ \.·!ith5,r: ｴ｡ｾｬ l;ol"izon. Decau::;e of ｴｩＺ ｳｾ the!:'e js r·n a. . II tj ""ycl _... ....11S1"I)' ｾ . 'V _ ,;.,,,11 vef -'V 0 sncCl'al '!-0(:> 1..1 < .! ,_ the po;,sibjl.it.y of any • Ｎｾｪ ｏｲｬｅＺｾ '-' ,;. ｣ Ｇ ｮ ｬ ｃ Ｂ ｲ ＾ ｃ ｬ ｾ '-.i. .:> ...... J.. j Ｎ｟ｾ '-.;. ;:, \ \l1, l'If"() v u d-f-)rl' (:,<:, _1 ....,..:.> 'oJ spc:i,cal scienc1.') fLdir:g a "1'"' C l' en, CJ S (G .., 11':1 41 l' '" C' 1". .:> C I' r ., (\__i ,0_", co 1\.. .' c.L. 'v' tbe d,:::finiticrl of th9 crisj , of J];uropean 3clc::nce). The . t 1·S,1:; 1 1.'[jtIns ' ' ' '1 C I. 10 l' ·c , ｾ 1 V ,S 1 n a S P (3 C 1. a 1. s c len' s c 1"e t 11'',11 ｬｊ Ｂｾ .. 1. •.-. .t...•. ｾ Cl 0' ."L. 1.<.<c'='. .1 .-:" ,.. 1-J I' )"'1'0" 0 ' ｾｩ . [11 .tv.,-,:> ｾｲ ..... 1 ＭｾＮ ｟ｾ ) I" -1-" 1 Less, . " CJ.lrectC(l . , " t o\'J,?l'(] S " J:< ｾ［･ o91nz, 1 .t-lorse\Jl1l his ｰｬＧＨｷｩｮｾ･ <l18 fJOt th8t provilLe as ｳ Ａ ｬ ･ ｨ ｾ thc)t-the ｰｨＰｲｊＨＩｲｮｴＺ［ｮｯｬ ｲｾｩｳｴ :ｾ •• must ri.se sbove the theoreizer who, in his ｴｨ･ｯｾ･ｴｩ｣｡ｬ ｳｇＱＮｦＭ ｯｲｳ･ｴｦ ｬ ｮｅｾＮｳ rl ｾ " ' 0.).)9C t'3 In 1-" ｾ ｵｳ ･ｲｬ states of t118 ｰｲｯ､ｵ｣ｩｮｾＬ devotes him:3 ｾＨ 1. f tot h e S l) b j e ｾ t. - ma t t. ':1 l', t h '3 the 0 r i (J S CJ n-J the method.s, ｡ｮｾｽ ｡ｾ｣ｏｬＧ､ ｩ｛ｊｲｾｬｹ kr,O'i',1 s not,h ing or -t:1-;e inl,'Jardn.. 80S of that p.rodncing \']110 li'jGS in prod,u inr.; ＬＧｾＱｴ｢ 'Joes not h.:J"i,'G tl"i'" produ':: ｾＬｩｖＸ li.fe it-sel L as . "'" l' 1 'I -, ,. ( ·'W' ,. 1 lJ) .• a tｾＱ･ｭ 1 vlll;;'11n :n.s llC c- 02. V1SlorJ ....:",:...:::.:.., ＮｾＡｐ III e C 0 U J. d say t h 8 [, t lVl' t I, i ｾｩ S elf - for get :C '.J 1 n e ｾ s :L S ,(; 1_13 :;!'.::.D...tJ,f:.'\.l" to the lHY..:,sj.btlit\r of t 1(:; snec5.'J.l SCien2G3. This ｳｾＡｬｦｾ i' ＭｲｧＧ･ｴｦｬ ｔｾＧＭｳｬＢｊｯｬｾ ､ not-TFer'8fo"·--:;·e -0'2 t:l :"0fl as 8 criticism of special scionce (as if it COJld do Ｓｮｹｴｨｩｮｾ else and reill&in science). It is ｲ｡ｴｨｾｲ a defifiition of sciefi.e. n' euse Et 3.381'1 of 1I1oi':),cism'1 3t this r.::oint '" ｾＬ r-' t y I s ",:181,:' \r . "1 1 "'::...._'::..!b_ d ,l ' easJ.._Y. ｊＭｾ ｲＬｵＮｳ ｡ｾ･ lrOI'l ,"erleau-on I!ly.1.S>...1..l.?J-e :!;i;;:l't l-:elp us to lDderstand. ｴｾＱｩｳ bet'er and to undal'st;J,rd. hO::J J:U5S .... r 1 'Jo;'ld de ｾＢ･ｲｪ､ :: imse 1 f aga ins t cer ta in ace US:j t ions. 299 One m2.Y very of l;/hat be calls the !lpercvltual :·'Grleau-Fonty st.:'1.tes: c to :L':1e",tify it ｾ＼ｊｬＮｴｨ tl,t;l re9.sons Hhich i.-./e ｳｰＨＺＡ｡ｫｩｮｾ［ In faith li , •• have to restore it ＺＭｾｩ she-kAJ1 has ｡ｌＧｬ ｾ［ Ｓ 50) value ｾ｣ ･ ｢Ｇ ＮＺｾｮ it has been ｯｮｾ･ Ｇｾｨ｡ｴ the ｲ［Ｈ ｬＧ｣ｇｰｴｾＱＸＮ l'c::;ist.an"e to Ｒｬｯｱ｢ｴｾ to nostl1Ld:0 2. f9.iU 0 Ｚ Ｍｾｬｴ :{at.lo oi':; c'Jrt.:lir, in tois ･ｳ ｦＡＨｾｴＮ Ｌ is to mafirl:l' beforehand tbat tln ｾ act, to find its first of all an--I ccr,SC:iOllS ｳｵｰＺ Ｉｯｾ･ 1.(5 inVE'sl,iJ.:atcd is anr.l Ｇｬ ＡｨｌＺｾ［ＧＱ always ｢･ｾｮ reasonable, essentially ｡ｾ､ is forthw11ith ､ｩＳ｣ｯｶｾｲ ｢ｬ･Ｎ That this ＮｪｲＺＢ ﾷＬL·ｦｬＩｲＧｪｮ［ｩｾｔ ＺＭｬﾷ ＧｯＺＭｲ ［ ＺＭ ｉﾷ［ ＺＬｾＨﾷＮＭＺ ') c,..;: :J ｾ ｾ .7) ..... u -' ｾ｟ t __ .... c. ｾ ｾ ',''''''''1;'<: .......... ｾ c;.;. -. 3""9')'[\<:" ."...,..::.; ｾ ﾷ［ＬｾＮｪ••ＭｴｃＧ \J "J, J,. __ ｔｾｉＮｬＺ ｾ ･ｬＧ 0° '"')") • ...... t}->A ｾ _ .' fOl Ｌｾ (ci. -' rel_6CG10n ｾＮＬ ｾ pp& ｾｊ ＭｪｾＭ?"" Eu.sserl l,,:o"ld say thf:',t ｴ［ｬｩｾ c, . 1 .;j u p'l _.: 0 a])'-()l ｾｲ .:> _ _ ｩＧＢｌ Ｌ･ｬ.A ｬｃｊｾＧ［ " '-' • ) _ ＧｾＭＮＩ \ ''1'',-1 (;J .til >oJ Lo.... ｮ･｣ ｳ ｾｲｩ｝ｹ 1'0 oJ ｾ ·1r:>;';"! t.:: .. ｻｾ v -::l II hRS of' '\..ij-,-,t1(..l, 1 {-; ...... is atl arr.r<'l:::rne.r:t ccnnt.ered by '0('_ pp. < To f:Lr:'.l 1'1";_ (V:r;.., G. ('T-r ＬＮ ｾ '-" ｳ｡ｾｬ a reason which consists llrr>:-i)l':"hOr(lll ｾＮＬ ｟ｾＮ .'1 l... , .. ｾ ..... in his Ideas '..(nerJ ＧｾｯＢ ［ｬＩｔ ＧｬＢｩ Ｍ Ｚｾ［ cf. .!-Y)llie :.J _ .:.._ -..) . .) ..l-' ｾ .J_ pro"Gss is lncvitable )r-() \ .) ｾ ｯＳｊｾ｜ｩｬｅ｜ｴＮｩｯｮ m i :::h+ l. 1 \J l-¥il<:: ,r.·n'.L .' ｾ . .J -.- ..,....l.. 0 t ...... - , ｾ［ＰＺＭ ＱＲ In:e-J.'eflet:;tivc life th2l ｩｾ ｩｾ｡｣ｮ･ｳ ｩｨｬ｣ to f8flection are, e not committed Ｌｴ｡ｬｾＮ ort ｳｩＬｾｴ ｊ［ｾｲｩｬ｜ ＳｊＮＯｾ f3t3'Je ｓｾＩｬＧＺ ･ 'iJ)si3 1'}t",f i.n1.:c' GO ｧｪｌｩｻｾ｡ｓ tile ･Ｓ､ＲｲＮＱｾｩ Ｑ ｲｴＳ ｬｊｾ ＱＧＳﾷ of ｾＭＺＱ･ ｰｲ･Ｍｲ･ｾ lc:cti"78 tel i:r:H extant that 'i'e 2ar. ｓＳＮｾ el)c thD.t it. i.'3 3 I)':;}"") th:?d: :tt h;-:)s no dis-· ccyverE:lbl •.; E's::;e(,ce or .l'e-'iSOn ard (B). tr· - :3. ｮｯｩＧｾＮＳｬｲ Ｇ ｯ ｳｊｲＬｄ ｾ the foJ.lo';1j.ng: SGY t1i2 Ifl 0: .I (\..__ Ｇ［ｬｾ v, "')' r, ＬＮｾＨ j -'\ ..A. ..... _ ............. It __, ｃＧｾＬ \. 1 LA..1. 18 ," i 0 l1 (''J _t·· " t... _ .... I 'J __. ".J .:;> ｾＺｬＩ r, P .1.i _, e ..rJ. J". .1 'Q ,.., ( ''.)'J:..,..l. r"' '" ; ' J. 'n .L , '-' 'J' ｊＧＮｾ • r 0'-' , r' "',. r. \'J ...t i f' __ .... l'a.ttona1. ｩｮｳｾＮ ［ｬＺｴ cor'?s ｾＺｯ bsar 01'1 it? .,.>i8 is sL'itil,tl.J: to S ar:;U2f,lsrJt a::.;o..1.r.;:jt r,yshcol03ism \,jl-:eretn he ,..iGIJld say th2t ｔＩｳｊ｣ＬＩＺ ｬ＼ｾＮｴｳＺｮ 3:J.yS thrd: corJsciO\J.SDC:::-:;;S ｊＮｾｩ ｹＱＮ ｬｌｴＬｲ･ｳｾＭ＿ＮＧ a real nSY2hic ()J'(Y"8SS, ':Jhilc o.t VOle SB.I:le ･ｭｾＺＧ C:.n:::l as a (; 0 n s e (1 ceo ft. lis ins i :::; h t) de ro:r i r: g t ｾＱ e po s, it") i U. t,' ｟ｾｵＮＳｳ･ＮＱ Ｇ ten ＰｾＮｳｾ･Ｐｴｩ｡ｬ Insight. r 1. s .:> e l' 1 r: Ｌｾｯ a 1. :.; (;, say t h '2 f 0 11 o',d 11;?,: I cl 0 no wish to change or transform what is essenLially vague and 0pB.OlE! or ob::;cure ir, .,0 ｾＺｲＮｩｨｴｬＨｮｲｯｳ else. ':':·is 1.3 ｾｮｩｳＮｵ Ｚ･＿ d'!e of Ci nDiv£ an:l G:f8flSivG ｲ［ＺＱｴＮｩ Ｐｮ｡ｕＺ ［ｾＧＢ 01' lO.;].:-;isn. ?or Ｚｾ (' I J.l (1 \,J' The .... '-,lp ·x·,..··... c oil-a ｬｴｾ ＱｾＧ . .... b.y ｬｾ［Ｚ｟Ａｃｬｪ｣ＺｲＲＧＱｾ｛ｯＺｲ Ｈｾｴｐ \vhi.ch t ＧｄＮｲＺｳｾＨＭＩｇｬ r)'"'v ... t,,;; ｾ • ........ ':...),; 1',".>1'.01 0l'ver' ｾ ｊｴＮＧｾＮｾｩＮ ＮＺ＿ of' p l""iL c1)i.·::-. and J '"'" ... .... or ｾＱｩｳ ｯｬＧ［ｇ､ or ｓｬ ｲＩ Ｇｾ ｣ｳ･ｲＱｯ､ b yr a · .ＱＮｃｩｴｬｾＬＢＮｯ･ｾ ﾷ･ｾｮ . . 0,:1 tl':L:; eS::ler,tic.d. cha.ra::-:l:.f!.rtSt,i.c. ;'y ｰｨｃｩｾｏＭ r;,J.'r1t'·r· l--c"'fJ r101'r'Jc-' '<'-1.' 01":':-J'-'0 1·.()· t";'{' 'OP""t r'lj"ll:->l-lv _'':> v .... ...., "- .........._..... •. J.. ......... L' -co Ｈ ｾ ｳ _\ .-100<:' 'l ｭＭＺｬｴＧＨＢ Ｚ Ｇ ｾ ＧＱ ::.t 'L' "'::11 rroi-.l--oJ 1 i.'; ＨｾｨＢＧｊ ' - v _ｰｾｴＱＮｃｬ Ｇ ............ ..... dl .• u ...... ＧｾｩﾷＢＩｮ Ｇｾ＼ＮＧ ,,.:)..... r-1· l'rl",.1e 'll"·:·w .t <J v..... c;. ｾ v"'"" •. its ,peti.., :;cD:8 is not one: 'i::::lt is , ... I -,i J • U , I.. . . . .. •..-oJ(-O. 'v!. J ｾＢｮＧ . .... \. •• ｾ ..... ( . . 11 • ..I. '"": l.J ｾＢＭｊｫＮ /, ｾ .... ｾ •• ,J _._ .:"1" •• to mainta't. ard rrescJrve t"1C r'?r-:.e:JtuD.:..ly ;r,iveLi thing s ｾＺ i v e r! (i. e . as l' 9 tic 2 n 1. L _._.::>-::._- u <, < 300 3':)1:) _ v J' '"JO" c,. \' t 301 3ec 8. Ｌ･ｶｾｯｪｽ 302 ｓ･ｾ a. bo',r '3 , 303 Sc.-:> c C, pp. ＮｊＩｾ 6• ＧｾＡ pp. 36. ;') bove. l)P J . 36 Q 0 36-7. ,1 ｏｾｬ･ ＧｃｏＺｊＱｃ '/ 30 Lt 'I ＮＺＡ ＭｾＢ ,...., ＧｾＱ 'Jf7( pp. ｾ (u. l:.. ..... 0'7 305 Illt'i. ｾ ｐｾＩ 306 , . ../ . pp. "'9'" ｾ pp. ＺＲ ［ｾｮ tllS ･ｾＩＨ［ ｾ ｆ Ｚ｢ｬｾ ﾷ 307 I1>..iq", 3c8 T1)is ｓＺＭｴｾｙＧｓ '1"'1"i ｬ ｴＨｾ Ｚ Ｇ ｉ .... l J.li j _ ./ J • J _ ... »0 - O' J ｾＭ .lk:; ｟ｩｾ ＮＲＢＧｬＺ ［ｾ ｩｬ ｟ t- ·r 'r' r,'PJ .Jo• • ". ' - '-.. "J """rd . .-j·v, ..) ＱＢ ｾｴＮ t, .:I •• V ＭＺＮ Ｉｾ ｟Ｚ 7- 0 1"0' (' ri :.::..... r c: .I _ _' ＮＮＮＮｾ m8_tte::' hCC:!cl'lSEJ or1 ......, +'") . . . \... 1"'! C' II ." .• ｾ '" "-' .J ｯＺＭ［ｏＧｾＢｉ ﾷ ｛ＧＭ｜ ·t-o - ... ｾ .. ｾｦＧＺ_.'-J._" ｾ［Ｇ ｾＺ ｬ j(. t Ｍ Ｎ ｩ ｨ Ｇ ｾ ﾷ ｉ ｾ Ｎｅ Ｍ ｊ Ｎ Ｎ Ｌ ｟ __ ..}....,. i, ｬ｡ｾｩｴ ｭ｡｣ｹ • , .b.!2D., PI' • )r-7 • 31] I ... t;::l , , pp. 5·3. 3 6 317 Ibi;l· I1?...i.9... 315 318 319 1-: .-...: ｾ pp. ＸｾＱＧ pp • 81. ''P1' • 1/0. __ ;"""'('\ ; , • pp. 30. 0 '0 """t ｾ ＮＺ ｾ｣ 71 . Pl.; • ｾ , 10Jd. ., I bid. , ｾｌＱＳ ｾ .... ＧＺ ｾｊ［ｲＺ :""I\}'r)·1 ..... ｩＮﾷ ｊＮｪＭＬﾷｾＱｴｲ 0) c" ' .. Ol.._...: ｾＡＧｏﾷ r) ''''J) .. ｾ Jo.. .:,.. Ｇｾ･ t' .I • ,L : ｾ '-',) • -, .1l"",:.):..., Ｉｾ n__ r " . ' . L . .. "'f . " , I. J 0.l.. rJ .... f.') .)l.,.l-l..,.. ｾ ..' . . . .,"'!. V :.. L , 0 ,:)41 • (, ,,_ ... ｟ＮＣｾｴ Ｎ Ａ ｬ '.) C,.,:;J 'J ｾ Ｎ , ..... J .l...l ..... ｾ .. (J• n Ll--· '.... tJ ..... ｮｾ［Ｇ 1 .. ＢｾＮｉｖ ａｾ i . 'r1.. -j- _." J , Ｚ［ｪＧ｢Ｍ ｉｾＬｲ ＩｾＱ ｾＬＢＧｖ 1- .... PJ.·, . __ . . . . . 1- h () ＭｬＧｾｖ ［ＭｉＧ｜ .J. J;. _ Y'j 'oJ. ｣Ｎｾ ｲｾﾷｬＮ _uJ ﾷＬＩjＭ ＧｩｮＬＮ ｾ . s . . 4"'_ '\,'J of nhi]' ｯＢｾｲﾷｨｹＧ .1."'---_''':>''-;''', ｾ """" 0ｾ l' '1. r-'r 1"';,,"! .. ｾ \ r:. ｾ ,:1-ir>}' ...._ ....... ' is ....... ｾ c.",. ,- ｾ i.' ,." \.I....,f .... .-.... L '" [. \,1 _. eo ＨＧｾ ｆ ＱＢｲ Ｎｾ｜ .• , that ':Ihic'r. is I'clJoal:::'5 by thr; l'E!du,:;tion to the rcducticn ani thereb" revalation. ｾｩｶ｣ｳ .., ., 0 ..-J '} tsl1s IYJ3t.!el.' is rl) i los c r: r' ,r 91) tt"iqt \:J:"':ic 1 is (> II{_,\-;" \l·"j-,,-'ir,l,.., (1f' .J .... \ . : ; . _.L. L\.,:. . . . . . )'0'-:>'0 . _"-' pp. 17 . ＳＰＹ［ｚｾＮＬ -.'. ｩｴｾ［ ＺＱｩ Ｚ ＭＮ ｴｾＧＺＮ 1-,' ,.. r ｾｊＮ Ｌ［ｌ ｴ ｴｨｾｴ ..... _. • p'''';' ....:....-.......... .J() "::111 ｾ '""'! (J . .., ] I.)'. . . . l .....·::> .... 1 .. , '} '"r- I _, C'",} c: ... u !F r--,C4.' .see the \'.'2 Ｑ･ｾｩｴ ｭｩｺＲｳ r) ...... G. -_'J , is thaL wnich 3' ｾｩＧ Ｌ［Ｎｾ J of 1"1-10 • ｾ ... "-'J) .. 't"ii8Y'cfors .) 1.. '1"." 0... .. Ｈ ｓＱｾＢ ｾ｣ as t·rt;, . . ,··(··EJr,,:lc'ni-··..J l ,£ t.L Ｎｾ ｰｨｾＮＺ ＧＩｱｇｲＮＨＧＺｌｯ ｳＮ (ill) -()"r'C'''I'''o<:.:c>r; r . . . -, ...ｪｾＩＮＬｬ ........... ,.,A", I -1 - ｾｲｕ｟｡ｄ Ｈ Ｇ ｯ ｮ Ｑ Ｂ ｩ ｾ Ｇ ｬ Ｂ ａ ｃ .. -.;:> j'V ro·;-. - t- .J<, ]'ｾＮ［ .J .1. • l" '(,pct"rl" -..... '..lJ T)r Ｌ＾ｾ l!:- f: ｾＬ ..... ""Jr[r \, \.. •. ｾ , t1-:8 a.1J·i. '1:0','::..:.':1 ':.1)0 ['iattGr of -just ｢ｳｬｏ ｊＺｾ ,c· l":'1e ｲｾｴＮＭｬ＿ｮｲ as :' 1 0 (' i' ? '1 -;- i ' (' t' i i- ]y.) 1 (J !f S -l- 0 'c'- h <) it ie; lithe matr."::r it:3elf tl • If OD2 '.:J3nt- 110: It •.: i-hl' ...:> ," • ｾ ｲＺ［ｊｩＮｬｯｳ ［｟ＺＡｾｔＮ ｾ r O-L• '. '-..... , .'l·"1'': •_,.ＱＮＭｴｲｅｾ '. Ll ",1 Th8 p;st-r'0(1 L:3 a \ e" <:; ". r,...., ......::JI· . . , '·1 ' ' 1,..., ＮｬＢＺ ｴＧｾＮ Ｚ ｬ J.;'l.oJ__ , L' Pus: ［ＡＳｩＸＮｾＺﾷ ｚｇｲ oJ' lr1i lc)sol:,h:l ",;/1":;01'. cocccri"[S ｩＧＩｨｴｬｯｳ ｾｬＧＺｙ 0 f :.:> ..... _ r. ," ...., n '::li .. "'Q ;;) ... ＢＨＮＺ［ ｾｴｩｲｬ v;l;::t t('j ＧＺｾｬ Ｂｩ Ｎ-.....ｾ ",..l' CＩＮｾ t'I o..ｾ ｾｲＮ Ｌ ＺＭ［Ｎｾ th 1·luc4,"'rJ L •• .:> ..> ｾ l-n ｡ﾷｾｬｏ -4. Ｎｾ ,} ·i i 'rl f'.J-J Ｎｊｦ･ｲｾＺ ｰＢｊＱＡＩｃ ｬＩｾ ｊｓ ＧﾷｮＺ ＬＫｾＭＮＲｲ us t1nt Ito '1 b 1__ 'j \.c;h "'Jr'. vＬｾ '> JL-, c.. I........ \.! j -..1 '"') ...I:::> I. fJ8 ｦＺｬＮｪｳＱｾ･ <j'r1 and de[tls - ｾ * J ::t J (\. ､ｯＱＧｾＬＨ ＩｅＧｮ C. / I • & t; 111 ｟ｌｾ • r 1...!-'./ L. r:::: • BIBLIOGRAPHY Hu.:>serl? Edmund. LgZj.. C8J;. J;'1'LQ.§j;J..ｾＮﾧｬＱＰＺｴｾＮｋ 2 volso J oN. Findlay'! trans" N6i'J York; Hl1lnanlt os Pres.':>, 19'70 0 .Js.tw.....Qf.-l:D0..n..Q11'l.(!!lOlQ2..;zo ＭｾＧＶ klan, trans. 'rhe - - ｾＭ ＢＧＭｾ＾ ＢＭ ｾ ＭＢ -- =- a ｉ､Ｎｱｾｬ ｇ･ｺＲｬＧｲ［Ｎｧｾｦ ＢＧＱＬＮｾ｜ Alston and Go Nakhni- 1,lartinus Nljhoi'f, 1970" ｴｾｑＮＺｩＡｊＬｧ ｩｑＮｊｾＹｉＺｴＲｬＱｗｐｏ ')8\-1 10£2" York: HUrDb.xdties Press, tlA Reply ,0 a Critic of my R(!;futat:i.on of Logi:;a.l Psychologism" D. hIillard, trans" in ｰＢｾｬＧＢﾧ ｑＮ｛ｬ｟ｾｴＺ｟ａＮｲ .. ｟ｷｾＧｹＮ･ｒｌＦｲｱＮＩｴ ＡＧ｟ｲＮｻｾｉ Q.f ＾ｙＮｨＲｪｑ ｬｾｨｐ vol. LIlT (19'12)., pp. ::>-13Q n Edmund Husser 1; A I.e t ter to Arnold ｾ Ｑ ･ ｴ ｺ ｧ ･ ｰ ｬ ｴ Ｂ Eo V., Kohatc, tI'ans. in ｐｨｄＮＺＬ ｱｧ ＾ｊＮＲＱ ｩﾷｳ［｡ｊｾ｟ｽ＼Ｚｏｊ ｬ Ｎ ｭＢ voL, XII (1963- ＴＸｾＶＸｯ liThe Method of Clarifi 5, ｡ｴｩｯｮＢｾ trans. }.n ｟ｮＮｲＭ＿ｴｳｷｾｶｨＮｴｊｉｑＮﾧ no. 3 (1974)& pp. 57-670 VI "E. Poh1 1 vOle ｾＭ Ｍ ｾ ｾ vl.,R. Boyce (.-ibson, trans" 1969.. . 1964) .. pp. ..Ｂ］ＭｾＢＭ｟ ｉＭｩ｡ｧｵｾ Te£];o Klein Jr" and JOl..ll'.lLV. Qf JJ1i.l° s.QI?ra:o ItSyllabus of a Course of Four Lectur(!s on ｴｐｨｾｮｯﾭ menological Method and Phenomenological Philosophy' (1922! 11 ir1 ｾｨｔ _J:.0Jll:£lLl ｴＮｪﾣＲｊｌｦｾＱＳＺｯ ｨｾｩ ｹｴＮｾ ｧ｟＿ ｊ ･ｨｅ［Ｎｲｾｦ ｯ｛ｬ ｾｮｯｬ ｧＮｲＸ vO.L 1, 1'1.0,,' 1, (Jalluary 1 70) c PPo ｾＳＲ ｢Ｎｬ n- __ ｾ __ ｾ tlKant and the Idea of Transce J.dental Phi.losophylt Tor:;;. ｮｩ｣ｬＧｾ J1'" and \,LE. Pohl i_ trans. in SOl1.thL,lE1ster.:.n Joul'n3.1 of P'1'losophy. vol 5e, no .. 3 (197+ pp. 9- Ｎｵ｟ｾ I) ｾＭｾＭｾＮ ＭｾＧＮＢ ｔｬｾ｟ＮｅｂＺｩ ｈｦＮｬｧｷｾＺ m> _ ' a •• ｾｰ ...k&JtlJ.t.g.f?o 1,1'Cl.rtinns h'ijho 'f ｾ ｾｭｵ｡｢ｮ･ｴＩ｛ ｯｋ transo Tbe 1970" r<. In (1 ＧＢｊｬｾＺ｟ｦｑｌｬ［Ａ｟ｩｲＮｑ 0 lli2.Sll.'LS ｣｟ｾＮＡＺＲ ｾ ｈ..ｲＮＡＱ ｌ ｾ TｴＺｾＮｑｬﾧｓ＿ｮｱＨｧ｟ｐ }?Q§l:?.Q.!J2el19J;.QE]l. David Carr ｾ trans" Evanston: NorthｩＧｊｦＮｾｳｴ･ｬＱＧ Unj.versity Pre:3s, 1970 .. ｾ ｾＬ 0 " •• . .t§J. . .. UThc Tdea of Ph:Llosophi,cal Culture tt from Erste Ph:i,J.oS01Jhte:. Ｈｅ｜ｬｓＧｱｾｊ ＺｬＮ｡ｮｲｾＩ Band VII)" ｅ｡ ｧｾ Hart-inus ｾｲ ｪｔｾＨＩｦＧ Ｍ ［Ｂ ｲＹＵＶｾ ｾｐｩＮ Ｉ［ Ｍ ＲＰＳﾷ ＲＨＩＱ YJith tnterpolatio.s from r.. p" 0=10 and ppo Ｑ ﾷｾＱＮＷ 'l'his translation 9 by Tlm Lynch, ］ｾ｣ Ｎ ｟ｾ ｡ｾ Ｇｨ ｾ ＮＧ ｾ｟ is found as an appendix to his ＬｈＮＺｾ ｑﾣＲｾＭｬＺｽＮ｣ i.e Ij..£.S'. " Hcl'fa.s tel' ｾ ｧｾＲｳ･ｲｬｾ ｽｾ ＿ｨｾ Ｙｾ Ｑｑｬｧｅｘ QA" 'rLC1 S j,::; ｾ forthcoming .. ＱＲ ｩｊｬｾｲ ＺＮｄＢＬｾＡ ｌ ＿ ｮ､Ｎ J..1dg§.!rs..:£t.. L" Landgrebe, ed .. and C;rw.rehilJ., and. K. Aru.er1.ks'l trC1.ns" ｅｶ｡Ｎｮｳｴｯｮｾ NOl'th\vestern Ur,iverslty Press, '19730 .. ｾｌＮｳｯ ｾＬＭ ｾ Ｍｾ ＱｩＹｾ and G< 'F'l'e:;e. tfJ.i'rege-Ihtsse1."'l CorrGspondence lt in South'\<1estArn Journal of Philosophy" vol., 5, no" 3 PP:- 83':95-;'- Ｍｾ ....... Berger ｾ ｇ｡ｳｴｯｮｾ ｔｉｬｾ Cogi.-t.9....l.fl ｈｕｓＲＮｾｊ 9,§...l'hilosoj).hy" Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1972" Cal'inft, Dorion .. !tAn Approach to Husserl's PhenornenologyH in rr'HW1)meJJ0 lOliLAnfLl'&? to ,ttsllls..m. IL H. ZaneI' and D. ｉ､ｨ･ｾ ed;;;. rimv York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 19'73" PP .. 31"Jfb" - - - - -.... ｾＮ 'ft!orld e lt HHusserl' s ｾﾷｊｲｯ｢ｬ･ｭＸＮｴｩ｣ in b..wrj".9JllLfJJ ｩｬｑｳｯＧｰ｢ﾣＮＲＱｊｲｪｾ･ｙ Coneept of the Life,vol. 7 ｾ no. 4 (October 1970). pp. 331-339" ｟ｾ ｍＢ ｈＮＧｾ c in ｓＹＩ Ｍｬｾ Ｎ ﾧｴ･ｾＧｽ｟ｊﾷｯ ＮｊＧ ｬ｜｡ Ｎ ｑｦＮ ｐ｢ｪＮｬｯ｟ｾＺｌ＾ HEusserl's CRISIS (1974)0 pp. 127-1 ﾷＸｾ D.. d the Problem of Eistoryll vol .. 5, no .. 3 Eugen" " vlhat does the Phenomenology of E.dmllnd HussBrl Want to Accomplish? (The Phenomcnologic 1 Idea of ｌ｡ｹｩｾｧﾭ Ah,Gronnd)tl. A. Grugan, trane" in ｾＧﾧｊ Ｎ ｾﾣｴ ｟ｾＡｬＮ ｐｨｾＰＱ ｮｯｬＮ Ｌ ＺｧＩ Ｎｵ ｆｩｮｬｲＮｾ ｶｯｬｾ ＮＧ ｾ Ｂ 2, (1972)0 PPD 5-278 llThe Pheno!J1erJo].og ieal Ph i losophy f E:drnlmd Husser 1 and ContempOl'dry Cr i tic ism H • R. O. El reton ｾ trans i.n j:'hc-llL.no.!J1.§nolQ.<:u'; ,of. ｉｾＱＮＢ H.O. ｅｬｶ･ｴｯｮｾ ed. Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1970. pp. 73-148 8 Gadamer. lL G. liThe Sc ience of the ｌｩｦ･ｾ｜ｴｊｯｲｬ､ II in Analec ta ｈｵｳ ＨｾｲｕＮ｡ｮ ［ The Later Husser and the Idea ｯｦＭＱ＿ＧｓＨ［ｦ ＭｯＧｲｮ･ ｾ oi,Qgy.. A:'l':'rymien'fec ｫ｡ｾＧＩ -cd" Dor-d:: echt: D. ＱＶ｟､ｬｾｒ ｾ｢ｵｊｬ lishing Company, 19720 pp. 173-186u (> Gurwitsch, £.iron .. ttCrit'cal Study of Husscrltg Nachuo tit in ｓｴｵ､ｪｾＮＲ ｊ ＺｯＬＮｾｆｏ ｄＮｑｬＺ ｧ［ｹ ｡Ｎｄｑ Ｎｅ｟ｾｙｓＡＱｏＮ Ｒｂ ..'L6 )Wal1ST"orJ: Northvlestern nni 'erslty Press, 19bb .. pp .. 10'7-115 ｟ｾＧ __ ｾｇＧＢ tiThe Last \'Jork of ｅ､ｬｾ ｌｊＮｮ｣ｬ Husserl lt in Studi.ef3 tn .Eb e ｮＲｭｓｬｑｊ｟ｱｾｙ ｡ｮＨｌｬＧＮＲＩｻｾｨＹｑｧｘ e Evan s to 11: Nor t h'W-es'tern University Fress, 1966. pp" ＳＹＷｾｴ ＱＸｇ Ｍ ｾ ﾷ ｾﾷ ＧｾＰ "On the Il"ltentionali ty of ConscioLlsness tl in ｓｴｱＮ､ｩｅＺｾＮ j.n -Eb 8"pome}'}..9J.ｾＮ｀ Ｎ ｙｾｯ ｢ｾＮｸｳ 0 1 e.g y" f;)J ans ton t ｉｾ or t hvl ester n Univers . . ty ｐｲｦｪｓ ｾ 1966: pp" ｬｩＴＬｾｬｌｉｏＢ ］Ｍ ＢＮ｟ｾＭ ｐｬｽｾｊＺｩｉﾣＮｑＩ ･ｊＮｧＬﾧ Ｎ ﾣ ＹＭｙｴＺｾ..ＧｓﾧｬｊＱｌｾ｢ｳＮ ｌｱｾ Ｚｧｯ ＢｾｑＬＭｪＮ Lo E:mbree, od" Evans' on: Hortb'l,'iC3stern University Press, 1974" 0 Heidegge.l', Hartin" ｅ｣ｩｾ ｬ ＲＹＺ｟ｬ ｩＱｑＮｯ Robinson, trans .. ｾ ］ＭＢ J" Hacquarrie and Eo York:: Harper and ROH, 1.9620 ､Ｇ･ｾ tlTho End of Philosophy and the Task of' ｔｨｩＮｮｬｾｩＮｮｧｬ ligJr!.Rc J" Staumballgh, ｴｲ｣ｬｊｩｾＰ and ed . . Nm,,; On.. Tirc..!.L{l»cl Yorl\.: Harper and ｒ ｯ ｷ ｾ __Ｌ ］ ･ Ｌ ｟ ｾ ｾ ｾｧＡｲｉ in 1972 .. pp., 55='73<> aThe Idea of Phcnomonologyn .. J' .1,1. Deelev and J .. A. Novak, trans. (\1i1.h assistance from E.D: Leo) in ｬｩｧ Ｇｌｊｩ［ ＱｑｬＮｾ ､ ＺｌｑＮ ｳｉｕＰ voL, 1+4 (19/0)" PP» 325-31t l.t .. rden 9 ROffi8.n.. tl About the ｾ ｯｴ i.ve s which Lc!ad Hasseltl to rrranscendGnta 1. Ideal ism!' in r.hG ｮｏＮＡｬＱｾ ｦＮｑ ｬ ｾｧＬＮｙ Ｒｰ＼ｌ N<i:(m:?l ｾｸｬ Ｎ Ａ ﾧｧｾ .. D.. RiePI?G, ed .. Albany: Sta.t UniV81'sit;)T of' New 'York Press, 1968 pp" 95-118", 0 Kock.elrSiUllS, J.J& ltRussBr1's Original Vi6:w on Fbenomenological p s yc h 010 gy n in ｅＮ｢ｳｮＮＹｬ［ｾＮｯ 1 0 Ji,Y...L"JLhSL. Ph tl..o.sop h ｾＭＮｑｌｘｬｉｕｭ､ ｬＭｭｳﾧＧｾｌｩｊＩ､ ..l.:t§...1l1t(.I'.l?J'ctgj: Ｌ ｾ Ｂ J .. J" Koc ke Imans, ed .. New Ｚｾ､ ｯｙ Anchor Books 9 196"1. pp. ＴﾷＱＸｾＴｬｴＹＮ ｾＭﾷ ｾＢＧ ﾷＢＧｾﾷ ｯＮ flPhenomenolog. cal... Pcychol .gical and ｲ ｡ｮｳ｣ｾ Rea.lity in Husserl's 'CrtsL HI in ｾ ｲｬ＼ Ｎ ｱﾣｬｾ Huss8rllana: The Later Husserl a ｾ t e Id08 of Phen ･ｮ､･ｮｴＲｾ D ｾ ｾ He Ide 1 ｰｭｾｮｬ ＵｩｙＺｾﾷＷ Ｍ［ＮＱＧＺＭｔｙｬ Ｇｪ Ｎ･ｩＱ ｣ｔｲｾﾷＭ［ ｾ｣ＺｃＮＭ ｄｯｲ｡Ｚｬ ･｣［ＧｆｩｔＺＭ Publishing Gompany, ＱＹＷＲｾ ｰｾ 78-900 Levinas, Eo ｾＮｲｑｌｓｊｉｔ ＮｐＱ of_l!ltJJ.ill&n.j,J:1..li!.l§crl ｲＮｌｆｨｗｑＮｬＱＦｄｯ｟ｑｾ ｯ Ii" Oriaule" trans., Evanston: ｾ＼ｯｉＧ hwestern University ｐｲ･ｳ ｾ 197j<; Madison, GoB. nphenomenology and Existenttalism: the En::! of in ｦｵｾｳ ｲ .ＮｬＺ｟ｾｩ＿ｴｑｮｌ P. HcCormick: and Fo EIJ,6s' on, eds. Sou ,h of Notre Dame Press, forthcomingo IdeaU.sm '1 ｾ､ｈｊ ｂ HUSSGl'l ..ｾＮｮＡＱ ｯＬｾｍｃｏｲｐＲｊｴＮ and Unhrersity MerlGau""Ponty, Haurice o "Preface" to his 'p'hefi9J.lfJlQIQ.gL.Qf ｬｾｪＢ｣ｴＮ ｊＺ Ｉｯ ｮ ｾ C. Smith, trans. I\)'cn:l Yorlu Humanitie.s t'ress, 19700 pp. ｶｩｬｾｸ ｩｯ ______ ttThe Phi losopher and His Sha' o'YJ It in McCleary,; trans" and od. ｅｶ｡ｲｬｳｴＨＩｮｾ ｾｯｲｴｨ｜ｶ･ｳｴ･ｲｮ versitiPress, ＱＹＶＴｾ pp. 159-182. Ｍ ｾＬ ＧＭ Ｎｭｾ R.C .. ＿ｩｾｮｳＮＨＧ ｕｮｩｾ .. tlFb.e.lomenology and the Sciences of Han H " John \rliId, ｴｊＺ｡Ｎｮｳｾ in ｉｲｬＱＮｾ .ＮｊｬＧｩｧＺｾ ｯｲｾｐ｣･ｰｴｑｄＬＮ J.M. lliil3, cd. Eva.Dston: I\;orthvlGstern Urliversity Press, ＱＹＶｌｾ･ pp. 4-3- 95., Natanson .. M.. EdmU.l1cl. ｾｬ｣Ｚ ｳ ｵｌ Philosonher of Infil-llte Tasks. Ev 3118 ton-;-11 O"2""fives te r n Un i v ･ＧｲｳＱｙＭ［ｔＹＷＳｾ Ricouer Paul. llPhenomenology". D.J. Eerman and D. Hora.tio, t i.u:\s .. in ISOll"l:b\'.lcsterr: Journal of Philosophy" vol. 5.. n () " 3 ｾ (19ＭＺｲｴ｢ｃＺＭ ｾｩｲｉＭＺｰ［ＩＭＺ ＫＱＷ Ｍ｟Ｎｾ Ｎ - ｾＭ , Sartre, J. P. ItTI e Phenomenology of Husserl" in ｾ ＮｩｲＡ ＳＮｴ iOllo F. Hilliams, trans. Ann fubort The University of Hichigan Pree-s, 19620 So!wlmtJsk:L H. gusgJ:l..ian ＱＮ ･､ｩｴ｡ ｩｯｾＱＮＲ｟ｌｂｯ ｶｬＮｯ Ｇｧｳ Evanston: ｎｯｲｴｨｾＢ･ｳｴ ｲｮ ｙｲ･ｳｾｄＮ ｴ University Press, 197 Li-. ｔｬ ｊＮＱｧＬｾＮ 2 vol;;)" The