“Horizon. Studies in Phenomenology” (Vol. 13, No. 2 2024)

Special Issue

“Phenomenology and Aesthetics”

Guest Editors:

Svetlana Nikonova (Saint-Petersburg University of Humanities and Social Sciences, Saint- Petersburg)

Liubov Iakovleva (National Research University ITMO University, Saint-Petersburg)

The upcoming issue is dedicated to the relationship between phenomenology and aesthetics. The problematic field of phenomenology and aesthetics can be viewed in two ways: on the one hand, it refers to the questions that phenomenology raises within its own discourse, on the other hand, this is a theory of art that chooses phenomenology as its primary method. The goal of the release is to demonstrate the ability not only to build a dialogue within one's own phenomenological tradition, but also to find points of intersection with a broader area of art theory.

Phenomenology, despite its initial interest in the theory of knowledge, reveals a close connection with aesthetics. In Husserl’s work “Aesthetics of Consciousness”, presumably written in 1912, phenomenology is presented as a philosophical direction that most closely and consistently explores the problems of aesthetics. Such connection is not accidental. Both Kant’s aesthetics and phenomenological reduction radically transform the natural attitude interested in the existence of real things and direct our attention to ways of their manifestation. Following Husserl, authors such as M. Heidegger, M. Merleau-Ponty, M. Dufrenne, R. Ingarden turn to problems in aesthetics. So, M. Merleau-Ponty develops the phenomenology of the body, the intertwining of the experience of the world and the experience of the body, which can be seen through painting. M. Heidegger offers the most radical formulation of the question of the being of the work of art, expanding the boundaries of phenomenology to the realm of inaccessible, elusive, and phenomena hidden from our contemplation. M. Dufrenne reinterprets the meaning of aesthetic experience, the essence of intentionality, and the possibility of the subject's openness to things through a poetic vision of the world. In the aesthetics of R. Ingarden and N. Hartmann, a multi-layered structure of an aesthetic object is presented, in which the reality of the material layer is distinguished from the particularity of the layer of the imaginary.

Further development of the relationship between phenomenology and aesthetics can be traced in the works of J.-L. Marion, M. Henry, O. Becker, and M. Richir and in the works of experts in the field of aesthetics such as W. Welsch, R. Shusterman, G. Böhme, L. Wiesing, and A. Berleant. The authors mentioned share not only an interest in art, aesthetic consciousness, and aesthetic experience, but also a particular emphasis on transitional, flickering, elusive, unstable, and fragile phenomena perceived by the subject.

This interest is driven primarily by the need to rethink the already established tradition of phenomenology, to discover new perspectives in the study of Edmund Husserl's legacy, to revise classical concepts of intentionality and phenomenological reduction. Thus, reflecting on unstable and transitional phenomena requires different ways of describing the consciousness of the subject. All of these aspects are possible thanks to a deeper analysis of aesthetic categories and works of art. The work of art can be considered as a phenomenon with dynamic structure capable of setting in motion and depriving the perceiver of solid foundations. For instance, M. Richir emphasizes the relevance of the concept of imagination in E. Husserl's work, thus offering an alternative to the opposition between real/imaginary or the contrast between figurative/non- figurative art. He discovers its intermediate space, which is neither reducible to the real nor to the imaginary. The ability to perceive such an intermediate and dynamic creation raises the question of the contradiction of the concept of intentionality of the subject captured by the dynamic nature of the artistic phenomenon.

The rethinking of the aesthetic experience takes on particular significance in the philosophy of A. Maldiney. Maldiney goes beyond the limits of the concept of experience and attempts to describe a radical experience of an event that transforms and changes the subject when encountering the dimension of the impossible. J.-L. Marion examines the space of the icon, the phenomenon of the idol, flesh, events, and introduces the concept of "saturated phenomenon" which allows us to reconsider the relationship between contemplation and intentionality, including in the space of painting. Alongside the established tradition of phenomenological aesthetics, the theory of art in the form of literary theory, architecture, cinema, and other arts consider phenomenology as a method for conducting their own research. For instance, phenomenology is one of the most important directions in contemporary architectural theory. Architectural theory based on the studies of M. Merleau-Ponty and M. Heidegger turns to describing the experience of perceiving architectural space, reveals the existential significance of place in human existence, reflects on the bodily rootedness of humans in the world. The context of architectural theory is particularly important for the critics of the role of vision in the subject's experience. Shifting the emphasis to the bodily connection of a human with the surrounding environment allows us to speak about human not only as a detached observer, but also as a subject who inhabits and actively participates in the fullness of the world. At the same time, attention to place implies a description of its eventful and ritual structure, which lacks completeness and is permeated with elusive, disappearing, invisible dimensions, bringing architectural theory closer to the problems of phenomenological aesthetics. This statement becomes resonant with authors and aestheticians who draw from phenomenology. It is close to Shusterman’s corporeal aesthetics, the ideas of phenomenological aesthetics of the environment, and the aesthetics of involvement of Berleant. Also, this topic is significant for the aesthetics of visual arts. Thanks to recent developments in installation, video, and computer art, aesthetics is gradually moving away from the categories of detached contemplation and critical interpretation, bringing to the forefront the bodily and emotional involvement of the viewer. In this context, aesthetics questions the model of visual distance for more traditional forms of art as well. For example, R. van de Vall proposes a tactile and affective concept of image in his book “At the Edges of Vision.” Drawing on the philosophy of M. Merleau-Ponty, E. Levinas, J.-F. Lyotard, and G. Deleuze, on the one hand, and on the theory of new media, on the other, van de Vall develops a performative phenomenology of aesthetic reflection, visuality, and the visual arts. The film theory (by L. Marks, V. Sobchak, J. Barker) refers to phenomenology to understand the perception of the viewer, its aesthetic experience, and the genesis of aesthetic experience, it raises a question about the reality of the image, about the cinema's ability to create a unique bodily experience that is transmitted to the viewer. The theory of modern dance (M. Sheets- Johnstone, S. Kozel, E. Brannigan) and performance (E. Fischer-Lichte, B. Massumi, R. Schechner) continues the trajectories of thought of the phenomenology of the body by Merleau-Ponty.

The problematic fields and intersections of aesthetics, phenomenology, and art theory reflect a common tendency towards bringing together phenomenological aesthetics with practical and everyday aspects of life, with corporeality and embodiment, and with the characteristics of the experience of the contemporary subject.

Possible topics include, but are not limited to:

• The relationship between phenomenology and classical aesthetics
• Phenomenology and art
• Aesthetic consciousness in the phenomenology of E. Husserl
• Phenomenology of painting, phenomenology of poetry, phenomenology of music, phenomenology of architecture, literature, cinema, etc.
• Aesthetic experience in phenomenology
• Problems in the history of the development of phenomenological aesthetics
• The place of aesthetics in (post)phenomenology
• Phenomenology of urban environment
• Kantian aesthetics in the context of phenomenology (on the occasion of the 300th anniversary of Kant’s birth)

Deadline for submissions: May 1, 2024

Deadline for decision: June 15, 2024

Deadline for publication: December 30, 2024

The articles can be written in Russian, English and German — all three languages are acceptable (acceptable volume of an article should have 30.000-50.000 characters including spaces, footnotes, references, abstracts and key words).

Please send your formatted submissions to:

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. (Svetlana Nikonova)

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. (Liubov Iakovleva)

Convocatoria a dosier de la revista Horizon: La recepción de la fenomenología en Espana y Latinoamérica

Editores invitados: Jesús Díaz Álvarez (Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Madrid) & Jesús Guillermo Ferrer Ortega (Universidad de Wuppertal, Alemania))

En el siguiente número de Horizon (12(2)) se dedicará un dossier a la recepción creativa de la fenomenología en Espana y Latinoamérica, desde sus inicios hasta el presente.

Dos acontecimientos históricos marcaron el comienzo de la recepción de la fenomenología en España e Hispanoamérica: por un lado el proyecto de Ortega y Gasset de reintegrar la filosofía española en la tradición europea mediante la apropiación creativa del pensamiento alemán; por otro lado la reacción contra el positivismo del siglo XIX y principios del siglo XX en los países latinoamericanos. Desde entonces la fenomenología ha jugado un papel de primera importancia en el desarrollo de la filosofía de habla hispana. El pensamiento de Husserl, Heidegger y Scheler ha estado presente en la obra de Ortega y de sus discípulos más eminentes: Xavier Zubiri, José Gaos, María Zambrano y Eduardo Nicol, entre otros. La filosofía fenomenológica ha influido también en la obra de clásicos del pensamiento hispanoamericano como Antonio Caso, Samuel Ramos, Francisco Romero, Carlos Astrada y Alberto Wagner de Reyna, entre otros. Más allá, la obra de Merleau-Ponty, Sartre y Levinas encontró un eco en una segunda generación de pensadores hispanoamericanos preocupada por su identidad filosófica y problemas existenciales propios del continente, como es el caso de Luis Villoro, Ernesto Mayz Vallenilla, Emilio Uranga y muchos más. Hoy en día, la recepción de la fenomenología en Espana y Latinoamérica se centra sobre todo en el redescubrimiento de la obra inédita de Husserl y Heidegger y en su recta comprensión para abordar problemas filosóficos actuales. No obstante, surge la pregunta de si en esta tentativa necesaria los historiadores de la fenomenología o los fenomenólogos mismos han rendido verdaderamente justicia a la temprana recepción de la filosofía fenomenológica en los países hispanoparlantes.

Los artículos cubrirán en principio los temas de la siguiente lista, aunque desde luego no deben limitarse estrictamente a ella:

• La recepción de la fenomenología en la obra de autores clásicos del pensamiento espanol y latinoamericano como José Ortega y Gasset, Xavier Zubiri, José Gaos, Joaquín Xirau, María Zambrano, Eduardo Nicol, Antonio Caso, Francisco Romero, Danilo Cruz Vélez, Luis Villoro etc.
• El impulso que dio la fenomenología a las Escuelas de Madrid y Barcelona en Espana, así como a una filosofía latinoamericana en reacción contra el positivismo.
• La historia de la fenomenología en Espana y Latinoamérica, desde Ortega y Gasset hasta nuestros días.
• Los retos de la fenomenología en Espana y Latinoamérica hoy en día: constelación de problemas y diálogo crítico con otras corrientes filosóficas.

Todos los artículos deberán ser enviados a los editores para ser sometidos a un doble dictamen ciego.

Fecha máxima de entrega: May 15, 2023

Fecha de comunicación de los dictámenes: June 15, 2023

Fecha de publicación: December 31, 2023

Jesús Díaz Álvarez: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Jesús Guillermo Ferrer Ortega: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Call for papers: Dossier “The Reception of Phenomenology in Spain und Latin America“

Guest Editors: Jesús Díaz Álvarez (National University of Distance Education, Madrid) & Jesús Guillermo Ferrer Ortega (University of Wuppertal)

The next issue of Horizon (12(2)) will devote a dossier to the creative reception of phenomenology in Spain and Latin America from its beginnings to the present.

Two historical events marked the beginning of the reception of phenomenology in Spain and Latin America: on the one hand, Ortega y Gasset's project to reintegrate Spanish philosophy into the European tradition through the creative appropriation of German thought; on the other hand, the reaction against the positivism of the 19th and early 20th centuries in Latin American countries. Since then, phenomenology has played a major role in the development of Spanish-speaking philosophy. The thought of Husserl, Heidegger and Scheler has been present in the work of Ortega and his most eminent disciples: Xavier Zubiri, José Gaos, María Zambrano and Eduardo Nicol, among others. Phenomenological philosophy has also influenced the work of such classics of Latin-American thought as Antonio Caso, Samuel Ramos, Francisco Romero, Carlos Astrada and Alberto Wagner de Reyna, among others. Further afield, the work of Merleau-Ponty, Sartre and Levinas has found an echo in a second generation concerned with its philosophical identity and existential problems specific to the American continent, such as Luis Villoro, Ernesto Mayz Vallenilla, Emilio Uranga and many others. Today, the reception of phenomenology in Spain and Latin America is mainly focused on the rediscovery of the unpublished works of Husserl and Heidegger and on their correct understanding in order to address current problems. The question arises, however, whether in this necessary attempt historians of phenomenology or phenomenologists themselves have truly done justice to the early reception of phenomenological philosophy in Spanish-speaking countries..

We would be glad to see materials devoted to the following headings, although they, of course, may not be limited to this list:

• The reception of phenomenology in the work of classic authors of Spanish and Latin American thought such as José Ortega y Gasset, Xavier Zubiri, José Gaos, Joaquín Xirau, María Zambrano, Eduardo Nicol, Antonio Caso, Francisco Romero, Danilo Cruz Vélez, Luis Villoro, etc.
• The impulse that phenomenology gave to the Madrid and Barcelona Schools in Spain, as well as to a Latin American philosophy in reaction against positivism.
• The history of phenomenology in Spain and Latin America, from Ortega y Gasset to the present day.
• The challenges of phenomenology in Spain and Latin America today: constellation of problems and critical dialogue with other philosophical currents.

Deadline for submissions: May 15, 2023

Deadline for decision: June 15, 2023

Deadline for publication: December 31, 2023

Jesús Díaz Álvarez: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Jesús Guillermo Ferrer Ortega: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

“Horizon. Studies in Phenomenology” (Vol. 13, No. 1 2024)
Special Issue
Analytical philosophy & Phenomenology

Guest Editors: Garris Rogonyan (National Research University "Higher school of economics", St Petersburg) & Andrey Veretennikov (National Research University "Higher school of economics", Moscow)

Do phenomenology and analytic philosophy have common topics to talk about? Answering this question is not easy since the criteria for what today can be considered analytic philosophy or phenomenology are rather vague and often controversial. It is difficult to say whether in both cases we are talking about a philosophical movement, a distinctive style of philosophizing, or a particular intellectual climate in research. Many, however, are not particularly bothered by the existence of such criteria. It is enough, in their view, to regard analytic philosophy and phenomenology as notional labels that help in one's thinking as a first approximation. One can, of course, speak of two philosophical traditions in order to point to a certain set of problems and methods for solving them. But in this case, too, we are faced with the obvious fact that this totality of problems and methods is of an open character. For example, in the case of analytic philosophy it is difficult to say whether it has an orthodox core, or what might be considered its official teaching. Whereas in the case of phenomenology the role of orthodoxy still seems to be played by the works of E. Husserl. However, "heresies" today coexist quite peacefully with orthodoxy, and are often favorably perceived by it as its legitimate heirs and successors.

Nevertheless, despite the vagueness of the criteria for belonging to the either tradition, phenomenology and analytical philosophy have something in common. And that "something" could serve as a basis for a dialogue between traditions. As a historical phenomena, the two traditions have their origins in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Moreover, they have at least one common source – the works of G. Frege, which inspired B. Russell and E. Husserl, the two official founding fathers of analytic philosophy and phenomenology, respectively. However, more than a century after the birth of these philosophical traditions, it can be said that they have had different fates, both in terms of their internal development and in terms of their spread and influence on the humanities. Shared origins do not yet guarantee any mutual understanding or interest in each other.

Indeed, apart from the origins, another common feature for both traditions is their almost complete disregard for each other, at times reminiscent of the Cold War. This is even more surprising given that both traditions initially declared rigor, clarity, and systematic approach in solving certain problems. Of course, one cannot deny the fact of their mutual, albeit latent, influence on each other. For example, one of the most prominent representatives of analytical philosophy, W. Sellars, began by studying phenomenology under the supervision of M. Farber. And this could not but be reflected in his works, although he rarely mentioned Husserl. After all, it was thanks to phenomenology that concepts such as intentionality, intersubjectivity, and constitution became commonplace in analytic philosophy. And this is not only about concepts, but also about research topics and ways of posing problems. Otherwise, however, this mutual influence was more limited to restrained malevolence and disparaging remarks.

Today, however, the situation is gradually changing, and we can observe how both traditions are converging in a variety of fields of research, be they problems of linguistic meaning, perception, other minds, etc. From the frequent calls for dialogue, philosophers seem to have finally moved on. Therefore, in addition to the history of the relationship between analytic philosophy and phenomenology, the prospects for their further collaboration are of particular interest today.

We would be glad to see materials devoted to the following headings, although they, of course, may not be limited to this list:

Language and knowledge

• Meaning and sense
• Certainty and reliable knowledge
• Conceptual and non-conceptual content of experience
• The problem of the world
• Intersubjectivity
• A priori knowledge

Psychology

• Consciousness and perception
• The problem of other minds
• Intentionality
• Free will
• Phenomenology and Cognitive Science
• Mental causality
• Psychology of perception
• Mind-body problem

Society, history and ethics

• History of the relationship between analytic philosophy and phenomenology
• A comparative analysis of problems and methods of analytic philosophy and phenomenology
• Ethics
• Value judgments
• Society and Lifeworld
• History and Narrative

“Horizon. Studies in Phenomenology” (Vol. 12, No. 1, 2023)
Special Issue
Phenomenology & Structuralism

Guest Editor: Georgy Chernavin

The radically different strategies of interacting with “sound common sense”, found within two big philosophical discourses of the 20^th century (phenomenology & poststructuralism), led nearly to the impossibility of communication between those discourses. One could contrast the goal of phenomenology, which consists in investigation of Sinnbildung, Sinnstiftung and Sinnsedimentierung, with the poststructuralist art of forming, inventing and production of concepts. The passion for paradoxes, the provocation of sound human understanding as a motor of thinking (characteristic of poststructuralism) is still bound to doxa and to the common sense, although it tries to “turn it inside out”. Phenomenology tries rather to take a “step back” from solidification of common sense in order to observe doxa and the sense-building in statu nascendi.

Still the fundamental intuition of the structuralism is as follows: sense as a result, a side effect (comparable to optical, linguistic and positional effects), to put it shortly the fundamental “senselessness” of the sense – it needs to be contrasted with the phenomenological search for pre-predicative experience and for the “sense” of the sense. As viewed by a structuralist, we can be at the same time “engaged in the world through meaning” and “disengaged from the contingent meanings which the world elaborates”. What the phenomenologist’s reaction to the contingency of Sinngebilde would be? What form of disengagement would let us shift from the phenomenological to the structuralist attitude and back?

These attitudes come closer when one considers the idea of two “registers”: the phenomenological one and the symbolic one. Here phenomenology and (post-)structuralism meet one another, though not in the filed of ontology or theory of knowledge but rather in the domain of critique of ideology where one observes contingency of ideological institutions. One finds himself/herself immersed into the highly aggressive ideological discourse which is taken for granted by one’s fellowmen. What would be a phenomenological and (post-)structural answer to this existential situation?

We are seeking new contributions and welcome submissions, including – but not limited to – such topics as:

• Derrida as phenomenologist
• The contingency of the despot
• Doxa and the passion for paradoxes
• Pre-predicative sense & sense as a side effect
• The “sense” of the sense & the “senselessness” of the sense
• The poststructuralist and the phenomenological critique of ideology
• Symbolic institution and symbolic tautology in Richir’s phenomenology

Early Phenomenology in Central and Eastern Europe.
Main Figures, Ideas, and Problems.

Editors: Witold Płotka, Patrick Eldridge

This book presents the origins of Central and Eastern European phenomenology. It features chapters that explore the movement's development, its most important thinkers, and its theoretical and historical context. This collection examines such topics as the realism-idealism controversy, the status of descriptive psychology, the question of the phenomenological method, and the problem of the world.
The chapters span the first decades of the development of phenomenology in Czechoslovakia, Poland, Romania, Russia, and Yugoslavia before World War II. The contributors track the Brentanian heritage of the development. They show how this tradition inspired influential thinkers like Celms, Špet, Ingarden, Frank, Twardowski, Patočka, and others. The book also puts forward original investigations. Moreover it elaborates new accounts of the foundations of phenomenology. While the volume begins with the Brentanian heritage, it situates phenomenology in a dialogue with other important schools of thought of that time, including the Prague School and Lvov-Warsaw School of Logic.
This collection highlights thinkers whose writings have had only a limited reception outside their home countries due to political and historical circumstances. It will help readers gain a better understanding of how the phenomenological movement developed beyond its start in Germany. Readers will also come to see how the phenomenological method resonated in different countries and led to new philosophical developments in ontology, epistemology, psychology, philosophy of culture, and philosophy of religion.

Rеad more