英加登对胡塞尔先验唯心主义转向的美学论证

Q4 Arts and Humanities
Hicham Jakha
{"title":"英加登对胡塞尔先验唯心主义转向的美学论证","authors":"Hicham Jakha","doi":"10.18276/aie.2023.63-04","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Husserl’s allegiance to realism came under attack following his Ideas. Ingarden was a fierce critic of his teacher’s turn to transcendental idealism, and provided compelling arguments both for his idealist reading of Husserl and for his rejection of idealism. One of the main arguments Ingarden devised against Husserl’s turn was based on his aesthetics. Against Husserl, Ingarden established literary works and fictional objects as purely intentional objects that are (1) doubly-structured, vis-à-vis their formal ontology, and (2) endowed with spots of indeterminacy. These facts, Ingarden argues, necessitate the transcendence of the purely intentional object. In this paper, I explore his argument, while establishing the ontological foundation on which it rests.","PeriodicalId":37710,"journal":{"name":"Analiza i Egzystencja","volume":"36 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Ingarden’s Aesthetic Argument Against Husserl’s Transcendental Idealism Turn\",\"authors\":\"Hicham Jakha\",\"doi\":\"10.18276/aie.2023.63-04\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Husserl’s allegiance to realism came under attack following his Ideas. Ingarden was a fierce critic of his teacher’s turn to transcendental idealism, and provided compelling arguments both for his idealist reading of Husserl and for his rejection of idealism. One of the main arguments Ingarden devised against Husserl’s turn was based on his aesthetics. Against Husserl, Ingarden established literary works and fictional objects as purely intentional objects that are (1) doubly-structured, vis-à-vis their formal ontology, and (2) endowed with spots of indeterminacy. These facts, Ingarden argues, necessitate the transcendence of the purely intentional object. In this paper, I explore his argument, while establishing the ontological foundation on which it rests.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37710,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Analiza i Egzystencja\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Analiza i Egzystencja\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18276/aie.2023.63-04\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analiza i Egzystencja","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18276/aie.2023.63-04","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

胡塞尔对现实主义的忠诚在他的《思想》之后受到了攻击。因加登强烈批评他的老师转向先验唯心主义,并为他对胡塞尔的唯心主义阅读和他对唯心主义的拒绝提供了令人信服的论据。因加登提出的反对胡塞尔的主要论点之一是基于他的美学。与胡塞尔相反,因加登将文学作品和虚构对象确立为纯粹的意向性对象,它们(1)具有双重结构,相对于-à-vis它们的形式本体论,(2)具有不确定性。因加登认为,这些事实使得超越纯粹意向性客体成为必要。在本文中,我探讨了他的论点,同时建立了其所依赖的本体论基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Ingarden’s Aesthetic Argument Against Husserl’s Transcendental Idealism Turn
Husserl’s allegiance to realism came under attack following his Ideas. Ingarden was a fierce critic of his teacher’s turn to transcendental idealism, and provided compelling arguments both for his idealist reading of Husserl and for his rejection of idealism. One of the main arguments Ingarden devised against Husserl’s turn was based on his aesthetics. Against Husserl, Ingarden established literary works and fictional objects as purely intentional objects that are (1) doubly-structured, vis-à-vis their formal ontology, and (2) endowed with spots of indeterminacy. These facts, Ingarden argues, necessitate the transcendence of the purely intentional object. In this paper, I explore his argument, while establishing the ontological foundation on which it rests.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Analiza i Egzystencja
Analiza i Egzystencja Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: «Analysis and Existence» is a quarterly published in paper version (the basic version) and electronically (in Open Access system); licence CC BY-SA. The Journal is included in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The Journal has been published since 2005, at the beginning twice a year, and since 2011 as a quarterly. Since 2007 the Journal has been listed in the DOAJ, since 2015 in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH PLUS), and since 2016 in the SCOPUS. The Journal has been publishing articles in Polish, English and German. In 2017 there were 40 volumes of the Journal «Analysis and Existence». Among the authors who have published their articles in the Journal there were such celebrities as Rae Langton, Graham Oppy, Wlodek Rabinowicz, Richard Rorty, John Skorupski, Richard Swinburne, and Michael Teunissen. We invite to cooperate with the Journal all the scholars who investigate existential problems, as well as the ones who concentrate on analysis and arguments. We aspire to a philosophy that is solid and reliable as much as possible, a philosophy that deals with important existential questions. We proceed only papers submitted on this webside by "Suggest article".
×
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