Studies in Phenomenology



Article/Publication Details
Views: 3480


FORMS OF PHILOSOPHICAL WONDER: HUSSERL AND WITTGENSTEIN ON THE OBVIOUS

Title in the language of publication: ФОРМЫ ФИЛОСОФСКОГО УДИВЛЕНИЯ: ГУССЕРЛЬ И ВИТГЕНШТЕЙН О САМОПОНЯТНОМ
Author: Georgy Chernavin
Issue: HORIZON. Studies in Phenomenology.
Vol. 6, №2 (2017),  164-176
Language: Russian
Document type: Research Article
DOI : 10.21638/2226-5260-2017-6-2-164-176 PDF (Загрузок: 3779)

Abstract
The article raises the question of possible common philosophical experience, a more fundamental one that the usual division into schools or traditions of philosophy. I propose to seek for such an experience in a typical (for the twentieth-century philosophy) form of a philosophical wonder which I would call the “oddity of the obvious”. Using the example of the Husserl’s and Wittgenstein’s philosophies, I try to demonstrate how this experience works, showing the important discrepancy between the two philosophers: a differently placed frontier between the sense and the nonsense. The most striking feature that characterizes the types of philosophical wonder established in the analytical and phenomenological traditions is an element that escapes their view: in the first case it is the being-in-itself which is considered absurd (widersinnig); in the second case it is pre-predicative experience which is proclaimed meaningless (unsinnig). I specify what strategies Husserl and Wittgenstein use, dealing with the experience of the “oddity of the obvious”; namely, they try either to retain the incomprehensibility of the obvious or to dissolve the “mental cramp”. The philosophical tradition (phenomenological or analytical one) takes one of the possible forms of the philosophical wonder to be the basic form. For the phenomenological philosophy, quite an emblematic feature is the effort to retain the “oddity of the obvious”, and for the analytical philosophy (of wittgensteinian provenance) – the dissolution of “mental cramp”, of philosophical bewilderment, the release from vague intellectual disquiet. Concluding the article, I propose to consider the alteration of the philosophical wonder models as a possibility of overcoming intrashop discrepancies between the philosophical traditions.

Key words
Key words: Оbviousness, sense, nonsense, philosophical wonder, Edmund Husserl, Ludwig Wittgenstein.

References

  • Ambrose, A. (Ed.). (2001) Wittgenstein’s Lectures, Cambridge (1932-1935): From the Notes of Alice Ambrose and Margaret Macdonald. NY: Prometheus Books.
  • Gachoud, F. (2011). La philosophie comme exercice du vertige. Paris: Cerf.
  • Gusserl’, E. (2001). Logicheskie issledovania. T. II (1) [Logical Investigations]. In Sobranie sochinenii[Collected Works]. Moscow: Gnozis. (in Russian).
  • Gusserl’, E. (2013) Krizis evropeiskikh nauk i transtsendental’naia fenomenologiia [The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology]. St. Petersburg: Nauka. (in Russian).
  • Hems, J. M. (1976). Husserl and/or Wittgenstein. In H.A. Durfee (Ed.), Analytic Philosophy and Phenomenology. American University Publications in Philosophy, Vol. 2 (55-86). Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Hintikka, J. (Ed.). (1991). Wittgenstein in Florida. Proceedings of the Colloquium on the Philosophy of Ludwig Wittgenstein, Florida State University, 7–8 August 1989. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  • Husserl, E. (1968). Phänomenologische Psychologie (Hua IX). Den Haag: M. Nijhoff.
  • Husserl, E. (1969). Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die tranzendentale Phänomenologie (Hua VI). Den Haag: M. Nijhoff.
  • Husserl, E. (1970). Philosophie der Arithmetik: Psychologische und logische Untersuchungen mit ergänzenden Texten (1890-1901) (Hua XII). Den Haag: M. Nijhoff.
  • Husserl, E. (1984). Logische Untersuchungen (Hua XIX/1). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  • Husserl, E. (1989). Aufsätze und Vorträge (1922-1937) (Hua XXIX). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  • Husserl, E. (2002). Zur phänomenologischen Reduktion, Texte aus dem Nachlass (1926-1935) (Hua XXXIV). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer.
  • Kuusela, O. (2008). The Struggle against Dogmatism: Wittgenstein and the Concept of Philosophy. Harvard University Press.
  • Meixner, U. (2014). Defending Husserl: A Plea in the Case of Wittgenstein and Company versus Phenomenology. De Gruyter.
  • Penkner, F. (2006). Wittgensteins Witz. Zur Lesart der Philosophischen Untersuchungen. Dissertation. Wien.
    Retrieved from http://www.sammelpunkt.philo.at:8080/1445/1/wittgenstein-witz.pdf - 14.12.17.
  • Peursen, van C. A. (1959). Edmund Husserl and Ludwig Wittgenstein. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 20 (2), 181-197.
  • Ricœur, P. (1976). Husserl and Wittgenstein on Language. In H.A. Durfee (Ed.), Analytic Philosophy and Phenomenology. American University Publications in Philosophy, Vol. 2 (87-95). Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Taguchi, S. (2006) Das Problem des ‚Ur-Ich‘ bei Edmund Husserl: Die Frage nach der selbstverständlichen ‚Nähe‘ des Selbst. Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Vittgenshtejn, L. (1994). Filosofskie raboty. T. I [Philosophical Works]. Moscow: Gnozis. (in Russian).
  • Vittgenshtejn, L. (2008). Golubaja i korichnevaja knigi: predvaritel’nye materialy k «Filosofskim issledovanijam» [Blue and Brown Books: Preliminary Materials to “Philosophical Research”]. Novosibirsk: Sibirskoe universitetskoe izdatel’stvo. (in Russian).
  • Wittgenstein, L. (1969a). Philosophische Grammatik. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Wittgenstein, L. (1969b). Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  • Wittgenstein, L. (1976). Wittgenstein’s Lectures on the Foundations of Mathematics (Cambridge, 1939). From the notes of R. G. Bosanquet, N. Malcolm, R. Rhees, Y. Smythies, C. Diamond (Eds.). Hassocks: Harvester Press.
  • Wittgenstein, L. (1993). Philosophical Occasions (1912-1951). Indianapolis & Cambridge: Hackett.
  • Wittgenstein, L. (1995). Bemerkungen zur Philosophie. Bemerkungen zur philosophischen Grammatik. Bd. 4. Wien/New York: Springer.
  • Wittgenstein, L. (1997). Philosophische Betrachtungen. Philosophische Bemerkungen. Bd. 2. Wien/New York: Springer.

Article/Publication Details
Views: 4470


DEHISTORIZATION AND HISTORICITY IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE “EARLY” MARCUSE

Title in the language of publication: ДЕИСТОРИЗАЦИЯ И ИСТОРИЧНОСТЬ В ФИЛОСОФИИ «РАННЕГО» МАРКУЗЕ
Author: Alexey Savin
Issue: HORIZON. Studies in Phenomenology.
Vol. 6, №2 (2017),  191-225
Language: Russian
Document type: Research Article
DOI : 10.21638/2226-5260-2017-6-2-191-225 PDF (Downloads: 3345)

Abstract
The article aims to explain the connection of Marcuse’s concept of dehistorization with his interpretation and criticism of the Heideggerian concept of historicity. Dehistorization in Marcuse’s philosophy, according to my tentative definition, is the kind of transformation of the creative social forces and human abilities denying an existing reality that makes them elements of the mechanism producing and reproducing the existent reality, and thereby makes them a manner of repression of the human striving for freedom and happiness and a way to perpetuate domination. According to Marcuse, dehistorization is the main form of reproduction of the false totality. The idea of dehistorization is the prevailing critical concept in Marcuse’s philosophy. It appears in the course of his criticism of fascism. The basis of the formation of the dehistorization concept is Marcuse’s criticism and interpretation of Heidegger’s conception of historicity during his “Heideggerian Marxism” period (1928–1933). This Heideggerian conception is the ultimate achievement of contemporary philosophy. The ultimate character of this achievement is given to it, according to Marcuse, that it treats history from the viewpoint of being in contrast to Hegel’s idealistic dialectics and German historicism of the 19th century, which interpreted it from the viewpoint of consciousness or the spirit. There are four main tendencies in Marcuse’s criticism and transformation of Heidegger’s conception of historicity. 1. The deformalization of Heidegger’s treatment of historicity of Dasein. The explanation of the material substance of historicity, i.e. the explanation of the material character of conditions of human existence (Dasein) as the definitive feature of historicity. 2. The concretization of Dasein, its treatment not as an individual, but as a class in view of substantial differences of the environment (Umwelt), material conditions of its existence. 3. Following from both the deformalization of historicity and the concretization of Dasein – the rehabilitation of the “being-with” (Mitsein) and the public sphere (Mitwelt), and, thereby, of the space of political struggle as the sphere of authenticity. 4. The disclosure of the fundamental role of the phenomenologically considered spatiality (Räumlichkeit) in the constitution of concrete historicity, i.e. historicity determined by the material, social and political character of Dasein and the world. Marcuse’s interpretation and criticism of Heidegger’s conception of historicity and his criticism of dehistorization based on it paves the way to his ontological interpretation of Marxist dialectics as the method of the struggle against dehistorization and false totality and as the only truly revolutionary way of thinking.

Key words
Historicity, dehistorization, phenomenology, Marxism, Heidegger, Marcuse, space.

References

  • Angus, I. (2005). Walking on Two Legs: On The Very Possibility of a Heideggerian Marxism [Review of the book Heidegger and Marcuse: The Catastrophe and Redemption of History, by A. Feenberg]. Human Studies, 28 (3), 335–352. doi: 10.1007/s10746-005-7415-9
  • Borisov, E.V. (2009). Osnovnye cherty postmetafizicheskoi ontologii [Basic Features of Post-metaphysical Ontology]. Tomsk: Izdatel’stvo Tomskogo universiteta. (in Russian).
  • Broeker-Oltmanns, K. (1988). Nachwort der Herausgeberin. In M. Heidegger, Ontologie. Hermeneutik der Faktizität (GA 63) (113–116). Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.
  • Feenberg, A. (2005). Heidegger and Marcuse: The Catastrophe and Redemption of History. London, New York: Routledge.
  • Gadamer, H.-G. (1999). Wahrheit und Methode. Bd. I. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.
  • Gander, H.-H. (2007). Existentialontologie und Geschichtlichkeit. In Klassiker Auslegen. Martin Heidegger. Sein und Zeit. 2 (229–252). Berlin: Akademie.
  • Heidegger, M. (1993). Sein und Zeit. Tuebingen: Klostermann.
  • Heidegger, M. (2004). Der Begriff der Zeit. (Vorlesungen 1924) (GA 64). Tübingen: Klostermann.
  • Il’in, V. (Lenin V.I.). (1909). Materializm i empiriokrititsizm. Kriticheskie zametki ob odnoi reaktsionnoi filosofii [Materialism and Empiriocritisizm]. Moscow: Zveno. (in Russian).
  • Marcuse, H. (1965a). Der Kampf gegen den Liberalismus in der totalitaeren Staatsauffassung. In H. Marcuse, Kultur und Gesellschaft I (17–55). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Marcuse, H. (1965b). Über die philosophische Grundlagen des wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Arbeitsbegriff. In H. Marcuse, Kultur und Gesellschaft II (7–48). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Marcuse, H. (1969). Neue Quellen zur Grundlegung des historischen Materialismus. In H. Marcuse. Ideen zu einer kritischen Theorie der Gesellschaft (7–54). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Marcuse, H. (1975). Hegels Ontologie und die Theorie der Geschichtlichkeit. Dritte Auflage. Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.
  • Marcuse, H. (1978). Beiträge zur Phänomenologie des Historischen Materialismus. In H. Marcuse, Schriften. Bd. I. Erste Auflage (347–384). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
  • Marcuse, H. (1998). Technology, War and Fascism. In H. Marcuse, Collected Papers. Vol. 1. London, New York: Routledge.
  • Marcuse, H. (2005). Heideggerian Marxism. Lincoln, London: University of Nebrasca Press.
  • Molchanov, V.I. (2015). Istoriya i prostranstvo. Destruktsiya temporal’noi istorichnosti [History and Space. Temporal Historicity Destruction]. In Fenomen prostranstva i proiskhozhdenie vremeni [Space-Phenomenon and Origin of Time] (244-255). Moscow: Akademicheskii proekt. (in Russian).
  • Patochka, Ya. (2008). Ereticheskie esse o filosofii istorii [Heretical Essays on the Philosophy of History]. Minsk: Logvinov. (in Russian).
  • Savin, A.E. (2016). Gerbert Markuze [Herbert Marcuse]. In I. Vdovina & I. Dzhokhadze (Eds.), Zapadnaya filosofiya XX — nachala XXI vv. Intellektual’nye biografii [Western Philosophy from XX to the Beginning of XXI Centuries. Intellectual Biographies] (181–210). Moscow, Saint-Petersburg: Tsentr gumanitarnykh initsiativ. (in Russian).
  • Strube, C. (1997). Nachwort des Herausgebers. In M. Heidegger, Der deutsche Idealismus (Fichte, Schelling, Hegel) und die philosophische Problemlage der Gegenwart (GA 28) (363–367). Dzhokhadze: Klostermann.
  • Wolin, R. (2001). Heidegger’s Children: Hannah Arendt, Karl Lowith, Hans Jonas, and Herbert Marcuse. Princeton & London. UP of Princeton.
  • Wolin, R. (2005). Introduction. What is Heideggerian Marxism? In H. Marcuse, Heideggerian Marxism (XI–XXX). Lincoln, London: UP of Nebraska.

Article/Publication Details
Views: 2667


VICTOR MOLCHANOV
“THE PHENOMENON OF SPACE AND THE ORIGIN OF TIME”
Moscow: Academic Project, 2015. ISBN: 978-5-8291-1752-8

Title in the language of publication: РЕЦЕНЗИЯ НА КНИГУ В.И. МОЛЧАНОВА
«ФЕНОМЕН ПРОСТРАНСТВА И ПРОИСХОЖДЕНИЕ ВРЕМЕНИ»
Москва: Академический проект, 2015. ISBN: 978-5-8291-1752-8
Author: Andrei Patkul
Issue: HORIZON. Studies in Phenomenology.
Vol. 6, №2 (2017),  390-410
Language: Russian
Document type: Book review
PDF (Downloads: 3291)

Abstract
In this review, I emphasize and analyze the main outcomes of the philosophical investigation presented in Victor Molchanov’s book. I state that Molchanov’s interpretation of Kant’s theoretical philosophy, which is based on the so-called “model of production” as well as his reconstruction of F. Brentano’s thought, could be very fruitful for the contemporary understanding of the essence and the limits of phenomenological research. I think that the phenomenal primacy of differences over identities and the methodological primacy of analysis over interpretation in phenomenology defended in this text are authentic theses that could renew the phenomenological way of thinking. The thesis of the primacy of space-experience over time-consciousness and the genesis of such consciousness as a kind of fiction from the space-experience is contentious, but could also be productive for the understanding of phenomena and the phenomenal world. The conceptions of the primordial body-judgments and space as condition of historicity are of great interest and well-reasoned applications of the main theoretical thesis of the primacy of space-experience over time-consciousness. Finally, I conclude that the author of the book formulates an original version of phenomenological philosophy. We could characterize this type of phenomenology as an “analytical phenomenology.” I am sure this version should be detailed and developed in the future investigations by the book’s author and his followers.

Key words
Experience, difference, space, phenomenology, judgment, historicity, Victor Molchanov.

References

  • Molchanov V. (2015). Fenomen prostranstva i proishozhdenie vremeni [The Phenomenon of Space and the Genesis of Time]. Moscow: Akademicheskij Proekt. (in Russian).

Article/Publication Details
Views: 3739


ON SOME MODERN INVESTIGATIONS ON THE WORKS OF V. SESEMANN OUTSIDE OF RUSSIA

Title in the language of publication: СОВРЕМЕННЫЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ ТВОРЧЕСТВА ВАСИЛИЯ СЕЗЕМАНА ЗА РУБЕЖОМ
Author: Vladimir Belov
Issue: HORIZON. Studies in Phenomenology.
Vol. 6, №2 (2017),  411-424
Language: Russian
Document type: Book review
PDF (Downloads: 2998)

Abstract
The growing number of studies outside of Russia of the work of the Russian philosopher Vasily Emilevich Sesemann, who was undeservedly forgotten in his homeland, gives rise to the need to clarify some important points that somehow manifest themselves in assessing the nature of this work. Two main ideas are substantiated in the article: firstly, that V. E. Sesemann was always a Russian philosopher and, secondly, a philosopher of original and independent, despite strong influences from the intuitivism of N. Lossky, the Neo-Kantianism of H. Cohen and P. Natorp, the phenomenology of E. Husserl and the new ontology of N. Hartmann. In his work, Sesemann sought to develop a modern version of classical Platonism and Neo-Platonism, which is characteristic of the so-called Solovyovian school of Russian religious philosophy, but enriched and critically rethought through the achievements of the most influential philosophical trends of the day. The author justifies these statements in a discussion with the most significant works of Western researchers of the Russian philosopher’s work, among which are two monographs by T. Botz-Bornstein and D. Jonkus, respectively, in English and Lithuanian. It is also emphasized that the ambiguity and inaccuracy of the interpretation of the position of Sesemann in relation to the phenomenon of intuition on the part of the latter researchers is due to the fact that his theory of knowledge is not a self-sufficient sphere, but is built into the overall process of human perfection. And, although most of Sesemann’s works are devoted to the theory of knowledge and aesthetics, the main feature of his thinking was systematic. On the original image of the interpreted theory of knowledge is built the entire building of his philosophy: ontology, ethics, aesthetics, philosophy of religion and culture.

Key words
Sesemann, Russian philosopher, neo-Kantianism, intuition, phenomenology, theory of knowledge, system of philosophy.

References

  • Anilionytė, L., & Lozuraitis, A. (2000). The Life of Vosylius Sezemanas and His Critical Realism. In J. Baranova (Ed.), Lithuanian Philosophy: Personas and Ideas (187 -200). Washington: Council for Research in Values & Philosophy.
  • Belov, V. (2015). Yavlyaetsya li German Kogen neokantiantsem? [Is Herman Cohen a Neo-Kantian?]. Kantovskii sbornik, 3 (53), 38–45. (in Russian).
  • Botz-Bornstein, T. (2006). Vasily Sesemann Experience, Formalism and the Question of Being. Amsterdam, New York: Rodopi.
  • Dmitrieva, N. (2007). Russkoe neokantianstvo: “Marburg” v Rossii. Istoriko-filosofskie ocherki [Russian Neo-Kantianism: “Marburg” in Russia. Historical and Philosophical Essays]. Moscow: ROSSPEN (in Russian).
  • Donskis, L. (2007). Editor’s Introduction: Mapping Inter-War Lithuanian Philosophy. In V. Sesemann, Aeshetics (XI — XXVI). Amsterdam, New York: Rodopi.
  • Ferrari, М. (2002). Ist Cassirer methodisch gesehen ein Neukantianer? In D. Pätzold & C. Krijnen (Eds.), Der Neukantianismus und das Erbe des deutschen Idealismus: Die philosophische Methode (103–122). Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.
  • Hartmann, N. (1958). Zu Wilhelm Sesemann. 1933. In N. Hartmann, Kleinere Schriften. Band III. Vom Neukantianismus zur Ontologie (368–374). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
  • Jonkus, D. (2015). Vosyliaus Sezemano filosofija: savees pazxinimo ir estetinexs patirties fenomenologija [The Philosophy of Vasily Sesemann: A Phenomenology of Self-Awareness and Aesthetic Experience]. Vilnius: Versus Aureus. (in Lithuanian).
  • Jonkus, D. (2017). Filosofiya Vasiliya Sezenama: neokantianstvo, intuitivizm, fenomenologiya [The Philosophy of Vasily Sesemann: Neo-Kantianism, Intuitivism and Phenomenology]. Horizon. Studies in Phenomenology, 6 (1), 79–96. (in Russian).
  • Konizkiyi, A. (1995). Vasilii Seseman [Vasily Sezemann]. Vil’nyus, 4, 123–130. (in Russian).
  • Losski, N. (1929). Die intellektuelle Anschauung als Methode der Philosophie. Der Russische Gedanke. Internationale Zeitschrift fur russische Philosophie, Literturwissenschaft und Kultur, 1, 4–17.
  • Sezeman, V. (1932). Die logischen Gesetze und das Sein: a) Die logischen Gesetze im Verhältnis zum subjektbezogenen und psychischen Sein. b) Die logischen Gesetze und das daseinsautonome Sein. Eranus, 2, 59–230.
  • Sezemanas, V. (1987). Raštai. Gnoseologija [Works. Epistemology]. Vilnius: Mintis. (in Lithuanian).
  • Sezemanas, V. (1997). Raštai. Filosofijos istorija. Kultūra [Works. Philosophy of History. Culture]. Vilnius: Mintis. (in Lithuanian).
  • Sezeman, V. (2011). Real’naya ustanovka i «chistoe» (bezustanovochnoe) znanie (iz rukopisnogo naslediya) [The Real Attitude and the “Pure” (Attitudeless) Knowledge. From the Manuscript Heritage]. Kantovskii sbornik, 2 (36), 83–89. (in Russian).
  • Sezeman, V. (2012). Problema idealizma v filosofii [Problems of Idealism in Philosophy]. Voprosy filosofii, 4, 127–134. (in Russian).
  • Slesoryunene, E. (1991). Stroki lyubvi i nadeshdy [Lines of love and hope]. Vil’nyus, 2, 127–138. (in Russian).
  • Sverdiolas, A. (2010). Vasily Sesemann: The Other and Time. In M. Drunga & L. Donskis (Eds.), Vasily Seseman: Selected Papers (15-33). Amsterdam, New York: Rodopi.
  • Tarasti, E. (2006). Preface. In T. Botz-Bornstein, Vasily Sesemann. Experience, Formalism and the Question of Being (7–13). Amsterdam, New York: Rodopi.

Article/Publication Details
Views: 2879


SHIGERU TAGUCHI
“THE PROBLEM OF ‘PRIMAL-I’ IN EDMUND HUSSERL. THE QUESTION OF THE SELF-EVIDENT ‘NEARBY’ OF THE SELF”
Springer, 2006. ISBN 10: 1402048548 / ISBN 13: 9781402048548

Title in the language of publication: РЕЦЕНЗИЯ НА КНИГУ ШИГЕРУ ТАГУЧИ
„DAS PROBLEM DES ‚UR-ICH‘ BEI EDMUND HUSSERL. DIE FRAGE NACH DER SELBSTVERSTÄNDLICHEN ‚NÄHE‘ DES SELBST“
Springer, 2006. ISBN 10: 1402048548 / ISBN 13: 9781402048548
Author: Alexandr Pogonyailo
Issue: HORIZON. Studies in Phenomenology.
Vol. 6, №2 (2017),  376-389
Language: Russian
Document type: Book review
PDF (Downloads: 3122)

Abstract
The review considers the main ideas of the book, pointing out the most significant moments related to the author’s thoughts on the Uhr-Ich concept in Husserl’s later phenomenology. The focus of the review is on how exactly the author brings the Uhr-Ich notion to phenomenological clarity as well as what the notion means in the capacity of “a self-evident proximity” of one’s own self.

Key words
Phenomenology, transcendentalism, apodictic evidence, thematization, intentional modification.

References

  • Husserl, E. (1952). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und Phänomenologischen Philosophie. Dritter Buch: Die Phänomenologie und die Fundamente der Wissenschaften (Hua V). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
  • Husserl, E. (1956). Theorie der phänomenologischen Philosophie. Erste Philosophie (1923 — 1924). Zweiter Teil: Theorie der phänomenologischen Reduktion (Hua VIII). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
  • Husserl, E. (1973a). Zur Phänomenologie der Intersubjektivität. Texte aus dem Nachlass. Zweiter Teil: 1921–1928 (Hua XIV). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
  • Husserl, E. (1973b). Zur Phänomenologie der Intersubjektivität. Texte aus dem Nachlass. Dritter Teil: 1929–1935 (Hua XV). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
  • Husserl, E. (1984). Logische Untersuchungen. Zweiter Band: Untersuchungen zur Phänomenologie und Theorie der Erkenntnis (Hua XIX/1). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.
  • Taguchi, S. (2006). Das Problem des „Ur-Ich“ bei Edmund Husserl. Netherlands: Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
  • Borisov, E. (1999). Problema intersub’ektivnosti v fenomenologii E. Gusserlja [The Problem of Intersubjectivity in Fenomenology of E. Husserl]. Logos, 1(11), 65-83. (in Russian).
  • Chernjakov, A. (2001). Ontologija vremeni. Bytie i vremja v filosofii Aristotelja, Gusserlja i Hajdeggera [Onthology of Time. Being and Time in Philosophy of Aristotel, Husserl and Heidegger]. St. Petersburg: Vysshaja religiozno-filosofskaja shkola. (in Russian).

Article/Publication Details
Views: 3479


EUGEN FINK
“PLAY AS SYMBOL OF THE WORLD AND OTHER WRITINGS”
Translated with an introduction by I. A. Moore and Ch. Turner, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2016. ISBN-0-253-02105-2

Title in the language of publication: EUGEN FINK
“PLAY AS SYMBOL OF THE WORLD AND OTHER WRITINGS”
Translated with an introduction by I. A. Moore and Ch. Turner, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2016. ISBN-0-253-02105-2
Author: Vadim Prozersky
Issue: HORIZON. Studies in Phenomenology.
Vol. 6, №2 (2017),  366-375
Language: Russian
Document type: Book review
PDF (Downloads: 3115)

Abstract
The main ideas of Eugen Fink’s book Play as Symbol of the World and Other Writings are discussed in the review and the most significant thoughts of the German philosopher on the problems of ontology of play are highlighted. O. Fink has managed to give a new solution to the ontological problems of play, as one of the basic phenomena of human existence, to uncover its previously unknown aspects and to show its dual nature and worldliness. In general, O. Fink’s analysis of play shows the productivity of the phenomenological investigations in new areas of research.

Key words
Play, consciousness, image, phenomenological analysis, symbol, ontology, being in the world, openness to the world.

References

  • Fink, E. (2010). Spiel als Weltsymbol (GA 7). Freiburg, München: Verlag Karl Alber.
  • Fink, E. (2016). Play as a Symbol of the World and Other Writings. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
  • Elden, S. (2016). Eugen Fink, Play as Symbol of the World and Other Writings [Review of the book Play as Symbol of the World and Other Writings, by E. Fink]. Retrieved from http://ndpr.nd.edu/news/play-as-symbol-of-the-world-and-other-writings/
  • Loht, S. (2016). Play as Symbol of the World [Review of the book Play as Symbol of the World and Other Writings, by E. Fink]. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.19079/pr.2016.11.loh