感觉的无根据性:对胡塞尔 "根据 "思想的批判

IF 1.2 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
{"title":"感觉的无根据性:对胡塞尔 \"根据 \"思想的批判","authors":"","doi":"10.1007/s11007-023-09626-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Abstract</h3> <p>This article critiques Husserl’s idea of grounding through an exploration of his notion of the lifeworld. First, it sketches different senses of the lifeworld in the <em>Crisis</em> and explains in what sense it is taken to be a universal foundation of all sense-formation. Second, it criticizes Husserl’s idea of grounding and shows that it fails because the alleged foundation—namely, the lifeworld as a perceptual world, or rather lifeworldly experience as perception—is inadequately determined. Perception cannot function as a universal foundation because it is always already interpretation. “The groundlessness of sense” means that the process of sense-formation can in no way rest upon an ultimate ground because contingent presuppositions and historical circumstances influence it from the very beginning. The paper concludes by discussing the consequence of this view for the relation between philosophy and sciences.</p>","PeriodicalId":45310,"journal":{"name":"CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The groundlessness of sense: a critique of Husserl’s idea of grounding\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11007-023-09626-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Abstract</h3> <p>This article critiques Husserl’s idea of grounding through an exploration of his notion of the lifeworld. First, it sketches different senses of the lifeworld in the <em>Crisis</em> and explains in what sense it is taken to be a universal foundation of all sense-formation. Second, it criticizes Husserl’s idea of grounding and shows that it fails because the alleged foundation—namely, the lifeworld as a perceptual world, or rather lifeworldly experience as perception—is inadequately determined. Perception cannot function as a universal foundation because it is always already interpretation. “The groundlessness of sense” means that the process of sense-formation can in no way rest upon an ultimate ground because contingent presuppositions and historical circumstances influence it from the very beginning. The paper concludes by discussing the consequence of this view for the relation between philosophy and sciences.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45310,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY REVIEW\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11007-023-09626-y\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11007-023-09626-y","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要 本文通过探讨胡塞尔的生命世界概念,对其 "基础 "思想进行了批判。首先,文章勾勒了《危机》中不同意义上的生活世界,并解释了生活世界在何种意义上被视为所有感觉形成的普遍基础。其次,它批评了胡塞尔的 "基础 "思想,并指出这一思想之所以失败,是因为所谓的基础--即作为知觉世界的生活世界,或者说作为知觉的生活世界经验--没有得到充分的确定。感知无法作为普遍基础发挥作用,因为它总是已经被解释了。"感性的无根基性 "意味着感性形成的过程绝不可能建立在终极根基之上,因为偶然的预设和历史环境从一开始就影响着它。本文最后讨论了这一观点对哲学与科学之间关系的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The groundlessness of sense: a critique of Husserl’s idea of grounding

Abstract

This article critiques Husserl’s idea of grounding through an exploration of his notion of the lifeworld. First, it sketches different senses of the lifeworld in the Crisis and explains in what sense it is taken to be a universal foundation of all sense-formation. Second, it criticizes Husserl’s idea of grounding and shows that it fails because the alleged foundation—namely, the lifeworld as a perceptual world, or rather lifeworldly experience as perception—is inadequately determined. Perception cannot function as a universal foundation because it is always already interpretation. “The groundlessness of sense” means that the process of sense-formation can in no way rest upon an ultimate ground because contingent presuppositions and historical circumstances influence it from the very beginning. The paper concludes by discussing the consequence of this view for the relation between philosophy and sciences.

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
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The central purpose of Continental Philosophy Review is to foster a living dialogue within the international community on philosophical issues of mutual interest. It seeks to elicit, discussions of fundamental philosophical problems and original approaches to them. Broadly encompassing in its focus, the journal invites essays on both expressly theoretical topics and topics dealing with practical problems that extend to the wider domain of socio-political life. It encourages explorations in the domains of art, morality, science and religion as they relate to specific philosophical concerns. Although not an advocate of any one trend or school in philosophy, the journal is especially committed to keeping abreast of developments within phenomenology and contemporary continental philosophy and is interested in investigations that probe possible points of intersection between the continental European and the Anglo-American traditions. Continental Philosophy Review contains review articles of recent, original works in philosophy. It provides considerable space for such reviews, allowing critics to develop their comments and assessments at some length.
×
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