Subjectivity Is No Object: Can Subject-Object Dualism Be Reconciled Through Phenomenology?

Q1 Arts and Humanities
B. Robbins, H. Friedman, Chad V. Johnson, Zeno Franco
{"title":"Subjectivity Is No Object: Can Subject-Object Dualism Be Reconciled Through Phenomenology?","authors":"B. Robbins, H. Friedman, Chad V. Johnson, Zeno Franco","doi":"10.24972/IJTS.2018.37.2.144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Transpersonal psychology has at times critiqued the broader psychology field for perpetrating a somewhat arbitrary Cartesian subject-object divide. Some phenomenologists claim that reframing this purported divide as an experienced phenomenon can defuse its philosophical impact. If subjective experiences are viewed as continuous with the lifeworld out of which objective phenomena are abstracted, the divide between these is revealed as a somewhat arbitrary, if useful, construction. This, in turn, challenges psychology to engage with subjective phenomena in a more substantive way. In this paper based on excerpts from a protracted email conversation held on the American Psychological Association’s Humanistic Psychology (Division 32) listserv, two academic psychologists with transpersonal interests explore this extraordinary claim of phenomenology, one being a proponent and the other being a skeptic of the claim. Two other academic psychologists with transpersonal interests who participated in this dialogue comment on its relevance for transpersonal psychology. The conversation focuses on the ideas of Husserl and Heidegger, and emphasizes how phenomenology might reconcile the subject-object divide through exploring intentionality, the meaning of noetic/noema, and thinking itself, while the discussion serves as an example of an adversarial collaboration in which disagreeing parties seek deeper understanding through dialogue.","PeriodicalId":38668,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Transpersonal Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Transpersonal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24972/IJTS.2018.37.2.144","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Transpersonal psychology has at times critiqued the broader psychology field for perpetrating a somewhat arbitrary Cartesian subject-object divide. Some phenomenologists claim that reframing this purported divide as an experienced phenomenon can defuse its philosophical impact. If subjective experiences are viewed as continuous with the lifeworld out of which objective phenomena are abstracted, the divide between these is revealed as a somewhat arbitrary, if useful, construction. This, in turn, challenges psychology to engage with subjective phenomena in a more substantive way. In this paper based on excerpts from a protracted email conversation held on the American Psychological Association’s Humanistic Psychology (Division 32) listserv, two academic psychologists with transpersonal interests explore this extraordinary claim of phenomenology, one being a proponent and the other being a skeptic of the claim. Two other academic psychologists with transpersonal interests who participated in this dialogue comment on its relevance for transpersonal psychology. The conversation focuses on the ideas of Husserl and Heidegger, and emphasizes how phenomenology might reconcile the subject-object divide through exploring intentionality, the meaning of noetic/noema, and thinking itself, while the discussion serves as an example of an adversarial collaboration in which disagreeing parties seek deeper understanding through dialogue.
主体性不是客体:主体-客体二元性能否通过现象学得到调和?
超个人心理学有时批评更广泛的心理学领域实施了某种武断的笛卡尔式的主体-客体划分。一些现象学家声称,将这种所谓的分裂重新定义为一种经验现象,可以缓和其哲学影响。如果主观经验与客观现象被抽象出来的生活世界是连续的,那么主观经验与客观现象之间的区别就会被揭示为一种多少有些武断的建构。这反过来又挑战心理学以更实质性的方式研究主观现象。在这篇论文中,两位有着超个人兴趣的学术心理学家对现象学的这一非凡主张进行了探讨,其中一位是该主张的支持者,另一位是该主张的怀疑论者。另外两位对超个人感兴趣的学术心理学家参与了这次对话,他们评论了它与超个人心理学的相关性。对话集中在胡塞尔和海德格尔的思想上,并强调现象学如何通过探索意向性、精神/诺马的意义和思维本身来调和主客体分歧,而讨论则作为一种对抗性合作的例子,在这种合作中,持不同意见的各方通过对话寻求更深层次的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Transpersonal Studies
International Journal of Transpersonal Studies Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信