“O esforço do homem para se pensar”. Foucault, Leitor Das Investigações Lógicas.

O <italic>Soi</italic> sartriano - ou da infelicidade da consciência

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

This essay is an attempt to read Merleau-Ponty’s <italic>ln Praise of Philosophy</italic> as a text in which the French phenomenologist breaks with Sartre and at the same time states his view on philosophical engagement and the relation between philosophy and politics. By reading this Lecture as a reply to Sartre I shall argue that there is a connection between this text and the lively debate that in the fifties opposed the two French philosophers on the place of philosophy in the <italic>Lebenswelt.</italic> In the letters exchanged at the time, first edited by François Ewald and published in 1994, one can find evidence for understanding their different views.
In the Lecture Merleau-Ponty never mentions either Sartre’s name or his philosophy. However, I shall argue that some of Merleau-Ponty’s most important theses are directed against Sartre, namely, when the former claims that there is an opposition between the philosopher and the <italic>man of action</italic> (or the professional politician).
In part one I shall analyse Sartre’s letter to Merleau-Ponty claiming that the Lecture is a self-justification of sorts and accusing him of practising the phenomenological ɛπoχη. This accusation by Sartre is evidence of a clear difference between the sartrean concept of “existential engagement” and Merleau--Ponty’s own concept of the refusal of choice.
In part two, I shall try to show that <italic>ln Praise of Philosophy</italic> belongs to Merleau-Ponty’ s inquiries in phenomenology and this fact must be taken into account. The analysis of Merleau-Ponty’ s letter to Sartre explaining the Lecture clearly shows the relation between the concept of <italic>good ambiguity</italic> and the concept of <italic>engagement.</italic> At this point it becomes quite obvious that the dispute between the two philosophers is not over the meaning of <italic>engagement</italic> but indeed about the meaning of phenomenology and phenomenological ɛπoχη. I shall argue that Merleau-Ponty’s <italic>ambiguity</italic> is mainly a kind of the husserlean ɛπoχη. I shall also claim that one finds a clear echo of Husserl’ s Vienna Lecture in Merleau-Ponty’ s <italic>ln Praise of Philosophy.</italic>
Finally, I shall show that both lectures are replies to unmentioned philosophers, in which both refuse to identify philosophy with political engagement or national engagement. For them, the task of philosophy is truth as engagement with humanity.
</abstract>

Fenomenologia e compromisso. O debate entre Merleau-Ponty e Sartre

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

The scientific phenornenology of Bachelard is constituted as an original reflection about the production of the scientific work, in their subjective (the scientist’s Psychology/Psychoanalysis) and objective (the phenomenon while measure) slopes. Inspired for a softer or a soft-headed phenomenology, the French author wanted to reformulate. some concepts and manners of seeing of the German classic phenomenology. Critical of the husserlian phenomenology of the concept of <italic>Meinung,</italic> Bachelard enrolled his epistemological labor inside of the history of the applied phenomenology to the sciences.
In spite. of, he defends the lost «husserlian purity», independently of the denial of the idealism of the absolute conscience. The main theory is the one of the “Applied Rationalism” to the science and the consequent passing of thc psychologism but, and at the same time, of the <italic>mathesis universalis.</italic> The “discursive idealism of Bachelard didn’t ignore the specific disparity of the several scientific practices, on the contrary, he examined them the light of what called «phenomenontechnique».
</abstract>

A Fenomenologia Científica de Bachelard

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

The recovery of the prejudice as well as of the authority and tradition that Gadamer accomplishes is made with the following goal: to point out the function of the dialogue, which has a main role in the legitimation and acceptance of the tradition. The philosopher introduces the dialogue conditions between tradition and the present time, all together with their prejudices and the mutual influences of the several horizons. Also, he includes the privileged condition granted by the distance of time. Gadamer wants to make possible to each and everyone to have what he calls <italic>Wirkungsgeschichtliches Bewußtsein,</italic> especially those who investigate history. We cannot consider history as an object that accepts submissively a complete investigation as well as a definitive analysis. Gadamer try to alert us for the danger that is inserted on the lack of our dialogue capability, which will maintain veiled precisely the kind of knowledge that we most want and need to know. The faith and the search for an objective and absolute knowledge or an absolutely objective knowledge is a mistake and an ingenuousness. This systematic failure cost us the lack of a closer understanding of the historical truth and it disables us of reaching the authentic <italic>Wirkungsgeschichtliches Bewußtsein.</italic>
</abstract>

A consciência histórico-efeitual de H.-G. Gadamer

À procura de um narrador. Ricoeur e a identidade narrativa

Nota Prévia

O Subjectivismo da Fenomenologia Husserliana e a Exigência de Uma Fenomenologia Assubjectiva

O Subjectivismo da Fenomenologia Husserliana e a Possibilidade de Uma Fenomenologia “Assubjectiva”

Book Review: N<sc>uno</sc> N<sc>abais</sc>, 1997. Metafísica do Trágico. Lisboa: Relógio d’ Água Editores.

Book Review: D<sc>on</sc> I<sc>hde</sc>, <italic>Experimental Phenomenology. An introduction,</italic> Paragon Books, The Putnam Publishing Group, USA, Second Impression, 1979, 155 pp., 20x13 cm, (aproxi.) 12 USD.

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 36 (2023): Issue 1 (December 2023)

Volume 35 (2023): Issue 1 (May 2023)

Volume 34 (2022): Issue 1 (December 2022)

Volume 33 (2022): Issue 1 (September 2022)

Volume 32 (2021): Issue 1 (December 2021)

Volume 31 (2021): Issue 1 (October 2021)

Volume 30 (2020): Issue 1 (December 2020)

Volume 29 (2019): Issue 1 (December 2019)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 1 (October 2018)

Volume 27 (2018): Issue 1 (April 2018)

Volume 26 (2017): Issue 1 (October 2017)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 1 (October 2012)

Volume 24 (2012): Issue 1 (April 2012)

Volume 22-23 (2011): Issue 1 (October 2011)

Volume 20-21 (2010): Issue 1 (October 2010)

Volume 18-19 (2009): Issue 1 (October 2009)

Volume 16-17 (2008): Issue 1 (October 2008)

Volume 15 (2008): Issue 1 (April 2008)

Volume 14 (2007): Issue 1 (April 2007)

Volume 13 (2007): Issue 1 (October 2007)

Volume 12 (2006): Issue 1 (October 2006)

Volume 11 (2006): Issue 1 (April 2006)

Volume 10 (2005): Issue 1 (October 2005)

Volume 9 (2004): Issue 1 (October 2004)

Volume 8 (2004): Issue 1 (April 2004)

Volume 7 (2003): Issue 1 (October 2003)

Volume 5-6 (2003): Issue 1 (April 2003)

Volume 4 (2002): Issue 1 (October 2002)

Volume 3 (2001): Issue 1 (October 2001)

Volume 2 (2001): Issue 1 (April 2001)

Volume 1 (2000): Issue 1 (October 2000)

Phainomenon

Phainomenon is an international journal specializing in phenomenology.  It was founded in 2000 and has been published since then with the support of the Center of Philosophy of the University of Lisbon, Portugal.  Phainomenon seeks to contribute to the development of phenomenological studies worldwide, stimulating original work in all fields of phenomenological research, as well as in the areas where phenomenology crosses paths with other philosophical traditions and scientific domains. Phainomenon also seeks to contribute to a better cognizance and understanding of the phenomenological tradition – both of its authors and its themes – accepting works that advance our comprehension of it.  Phainomenon publishes works in English (recommended), Portuguese, Spanish, French, Italian, and German. Contributions are accepted following a double or single-blind peer review process, always with external reviewers.  The current publisher of Phainomenon is SCIENDO, which belongs to De Gruyter Verlag,  Regularly, the journal has two sections: a general section, where papers are continuously received and published; and a thematic section, preceded by an announcement and a call for papers, sometimes under the responsibility of guest editors. The thematic section usually has a comprehensive theme, intended to encompass other philosophical traditions, as well as other disciplines belonging either to the social and human sciences or to the natural sciences.  Moreover, Phainomenon publishes book reviews and bibliographical notes and, though not on a regular basis, translations into Portuguese of fundamental texts belonging to the intellectual patrimony of phenomenology.  Phainomenon is published twice a year, in Spring and Fall. All articles, notes, translations, reviews and other content can be accessed and downloaded for free thanks to our open access policy.  Phainomenon is financed through Portuguese national funds through FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P., in the scope of the project UIDP/00310/2020.  ArchivingSciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.  Plagiarism Policy  The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process.  Journal SponsorshipCentro de Filosofia da Universidade de LisboaFacultade de Letras da Universidade de LisboaFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia - Portugal 

Phainomenon

Volume 4 (2002): Issue 1 (October 2002)

“O esforço do homem para se pensar”. Foucault, Leitor Das Investigações Lógicas.

O Soi sartriano - ou da infelicidade da consciência

Fenomenologia e compromisso. O debate entre Merleau-Ponty e Sartre

A Fenomenologia Científica de Bachelard

A consciência histórico-efeitual de H.-G. Gadamer

À procura de um narrador. Ricoeur e a identidade narrativa

Nota Prévia

O Subjectivismo da Fenomenologia Husserliana e a Exigência de Uma Fenomenologia Assubjectiva

O Subjectivismo da Fenomenologia Husserliana e a Possibilidade de Uma Fenomenologia “Assubjectiva”

Book Review: Nuno Nabais, 1997. Metafísica do Trágico. Lisboa: Relógio d’ Água Editores.

Book Review: Don Ihde, Experimental Phenomenology. An introduction, Paragon Books, The Putnam Publishing Group, USA, Second Impression, 1979, 155 pp., 20x13 cm, (aproxi.) 12 USD.

Search

All Volumes and Issues in this Journal