Milian begins his essay by highlighting what he believes to be the attractiveness of Husserl’s phenomenology. He explains these to be phenomenology’s claim of being a “pre-suppositionless discipline,” phenomenology’s elegance in its movement from the natural attitude to the transcendent ego, and the role phenomenology plays as being “in contradistinction to positivism.” Milian’s major point [...]
Archive for the ‘pure consciousness’ Category
F. Milian: ‘The Husserlian Ideal of a Pure Phenomenology’
Posted in Husserl, epoche, natural attitude, pure consciousness, transcendental ego on November 30, 2007 | Leave a Comment »
Immanence(s), Transcendencies, and Absolute Being
Posted in Husserl, adumbration, intentionality, lived-experience, mineness, pure consciousness, pure ego, reflection, universality on September 26, 2007 | 1 Comment »
*What I have written here is an attempt to make sense of our discussion and Husserl’s thought. While I would love to imagine that I was capable of getting Husserl in the first month, I hereby pragmatically stress that I am not in fact capable of such feats. What follows is therefore a particular interpretation, [...]
Intentionality and Reflection
Posted in Husserl, intentionality, pure consciousness, pure ego, reflection on September 25, 2007 | Leave a Comment »
Class on 24 September … In the beginning of class we outlined several “moments of insight” regarding Husserlian phenomenology, key concepts that reveal more and more about the philosophy. This served as a sort of review of the previous class sessions. The concept of Fact and Essence and their inseparability, the Natural Attitude and its [...]
Pure Consciousness
Posted in Husserl, epoche, mineness, natural attitude, pure consciousness, pure ego on September 20, 2007 | 3 Comments »
Class on 19 September … Today was our first day describing what “happens” after the epoché is put in place. It is important to note again the central role of the epoché in Husserlian phenomenology. In a way, a lot of Husserl “falls into place” after understanding the epoché. Why?