Husserl: Phenomenology and the Life World

00:44:59
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0sLHfcsPAA

Sintesi

TLDRThe video discusses the philosophy of Edmund Husserl, a crucial figure in 20th-century philosophy known for his complex writings and foundational work in phenomenology. Husserl aimed to establish a new base for knowledge based on internal consciousness, aspiring to address the uncertainty of knowledge with a rigorous science-like approach. This radical epistemology involves setting aside external perceptions to explore the self-evident consciousness, mirroring Cartesian methods. Despite these aspirations, the speaker critiques Husserl's work as largely unsuccessful, characterized by repetitiveness and methodological vagueness, yet acknowledges the noble ambition and serious cultural intent behind his work. The discussion contrasts Anglo-American philosophical traditions with Husserl's continental approach, highlighting the former's emphasis on external empirical knowledge against Husserl's focus on internal subjective experience. The attempt to find absolute essences of human experience through phenomenology, despite its ambitious scope, falls short due to alleged circular reasoning and problematic verification processes. Despite acknowledging the failure of Husserl's methods, the speaker admires his moral seriousness and commitment to philosophy.

Punti di forza

  • 🔍 Edmund Husserl is a key figure in 20th-century philosophy, known for phenomenology.
  • 📚 His extensive and complex writings make interpretation challenging.
  • 🧠 Husserl’s philosophy aims to establish knowledge based on internal consciousness.
  • ⚖️ He draws parallels with Cartesian traditions, emphasizing inward knowledge.
  • 📏 His mathematical background influences his structured approach to philosophy.
  • 🚦 Phenomenology seeks to discern eternal essences of human psyche through 'epoche.'
  • 🌀 Critics argue Husserl's method is circular and lacks empirical backing.
  • 🎯 Husserl's philosophy is ambitious but considered unsuccessful by some.
  • 🔗 The video contrasts Anglo-American and continental philosophy approaches.
  • 🔍 Husserl’s moral dedication to philosophy is compared to Don Quixote’s noble quests.

Linea temporale

  • 00:00:00 - 00:05:00

    Edmund Husserl was a prominent figure in 20th-century philosophy, known for his complex and difficult-to-interpret style and for coining new terms. His background in mathematics inclined him towards Platonism, seeking a universal foundation for knowledge akin to the work of Descartes. Husserl aimed to establish a 'science of sciences' to inform all other human knowledge, similar to Cartesian philosophical projects. He posited that the self is self-evident and that internal consciousness precedes external reality. This reflects the continental tradition, focusing on internal consciousness before outward realities.

  • 00:05:00 - 00:10:00

    Husserl's philosophy aimed to create certainty through phenomenology, a method to identify eternal essences in human psychology, treating philosophy as a 'rigorous science.' His writings, though vast, were largely published posthumously. Despite the challenges and perhaps failure of his project, Husserl's dedication to unifying knowledge into a single foundation reflects a noble pursuit, similar to Don Quixote's fictional endeavors. His approach contrasts with the Anglo-American tradition by prioritizing the internal over the external.

  • 00:10:00 - 00:15:00

    The phenomenological method emphasizes intuition, often seen as unreliable yet essential in discerning internal truths. Husserl borrowed the idea of intentionality from Brentano, similar to Freud, highlighting that mental life is irreducible to physical phenomena. He sought to establish a rigorous scientific foundation for philosophy, combating the effects of materialism by focusing on self-knowledge preceding external phenomena. His ideas challenged modern science's misguidance in understanding human experience.

  • 00:15:00 - 00:20:00

    Husserl's phenomenological method involves suspending the external world to focus on pure human consciousness, seeking essences common to all humans while bracketing externalities like scientific theorems. The aim is to uncover the elements that don't pass through phenomenology's sieve, similar to Cartesian reduction. Yet, the process is critiqued for its nebulous and seemingly endless nature, lacking clear truth conditions and consensus on what constitutes essential predicates.

  • 00:20:00 - 00:25:00

    Husserl tries to identify essences by subtracting non-essential predicates from human experience but his method faces criticism due to epistemological circularity. Husserl believed in empathy as a link to other minds, though offering no satisfactory explanation within his framework. His late work shifted towards the 'Lebenswelt' or 'life-world,' emphasizing human-centric time and experience over scientific abstractions, yet it remained largely theoretical and ungrounded in practical phenomenological application.

  • 00:25:00 - 00:30:00

    Husserl's philosophy highlights the challenge of transitioning between internal and external awareness, where the Anglo-American tradition errs on external precision and neglects the internal realm. The continental tradition, while nebulous, aims to incorporate internal consciousness, promoting understanding over precision. Husserl's concept of intersubjectivity attempts to bridge isolated consciousnesses, although without clear methodology, reflecting the insoluble divide between internal and external worlds.

  • 00:30:00 - 00:35:00

    Husserl, described as transforming German romanticism through Cartesian methodology, insists on self-knowledge as foundational, though his ambitious project remains incomplete. The difficulties in his phenomenology reflect broader challenges of bridging inner consciousness with communicable expression, making real progress elusive. His romantic vision of introspection champions personal experience as primary, warning against theories that deny internal realities.

  • 00:35:00 - 00:44:59

    Husserl's phenomenology, despite its challenges, underscores the primacy of personal experience against an overly empirical Western philosophy. It asserts the necessity of aligning theories with internal realities rather than dismissing them for lack of precision, advocating a philosophy starting from experience ('the things themselves'). This position highlights the strength of continental philosophy by emphasizing personal and subjective experience as central to understanding reality.

Mostra di più

Mappa mentale

Mind Map

Domande frequenti

  • Who is Edmund Husserl?

    Edmund Husserl is a significant figure in 20th-century philosophy known for developing phenomenology.

  • What is phenomenology?

    Phenomenology is a philosophical method developed by Husserl that aims to discover the essences of human experience by examining internal consciousness.

  • What was Husserl's educational background?

    Husserl had a background in mathematics, which influenced his philosophical approach.

  • What was Husserl trying to achieve with his philosophy?

    Husserl aimed to establish a presuppositionless foundation for knowledge, a 'science of sciences,' by focusing on internal consciousness.

  • How is Husserl's philosophy related to Descartes?

    Like Descartes, Husserl aimed to ground knowledge in self-evident consciousness, focusing on the internal self as the basis of truth.

  • What criticisms are presented about Husserl's philosophy?

    The speaker argues that Husserl's method is nebulous and fails to provide a clear connection between internal knowledge and external reality.

  • What does the speaker admire about Husserl's project?

    The speaker admires Husserl's intellectual ambition and dedication, comparing him to Don Quixote for his noble, albeit impractical, quest.

  • What issues does the speaker find with the phenomenological method?

    The method is criticized for being circular and subjective, lacking a way to verify its conclusions universally.

  • How does the speaker compare Anglo-American and continental philosophical traditions?

    The speaker suggests that the Anglo-American tradition focuses on external precision, whereas the continental tradition, including Husserl, emphasizes internal consciousness.

  • What is the 'epoche' in Husserl's philosophy?

    The 'epoche' is a method of suspending belief in the external world to focus purely on internal consciousness during phenomenological analysis.

Visualizza altre sintesi video

Ottenete l'accesso immediato ai riassunti gratuiti dei video di YouTube grazie all'intelligenza artificiale!
Sottotitoli
en
Scorrimento automatico:
  • 00:00:01
    [Music]
  • 00:00:14
    so
  • 00:00:27
    edmund husserl is one of the most
  • 00:00:29
    important and influential figures in
  • 00:00:31
    20th century philosophy
  • 00:00:33
    and this is despite the fact or perhaps
  • 00:00:35
    because of the fact that he's a
  • 00:00:36
    particularly difficult philosopher to
  • 00:00:38
    interpret
  • 00:00:39
    his style is extremely recondite his
  • 00:00:42
    writings are voluminous almost to the
  • 00:00:44
    point of compulsiveness
  • 00:00:46
    and he has a tendency to construct
  • 00:00:49
    neologisms
  • 00:00:50
    to correspond to the new paths that he's
  • 00:00:53
    breaking
  • 00:00:54
    into the realm of this of the psyche or
  • 00:00:56
    the realm of the mind
  • 00:00:59
    husserl uh his early background was in
  • 00:01:01
    mathematics which is very important
  • 00:01:02
    josurel is
  • 00:01:03
    perhaps like all mathematicians is a
  • 00:01:05
    sort of closet platonist
  • 00:01:07
    i think that mathematicians on the whole
  • 00:01:09
    tend to look for something universal and
  • 00:01:10
    abstract in all the thinking that they
  • 00:01:13
    do
  • 00:01:13
    and husserl who got his phd under
  • 00:01:15
    wyastros
  • 00:01:16
    in germany in the 1880s has a definite
  • 00:01:19
    set of platonic tendencies and
  • 00:01:20
    commitments
  • 00:01:21
    so when you read his philosophy when you
  • 00:01:23
    think about husserl's work
  • 00:01:25
    if you were to connect it and think of
  • 00:01:27
    it in terms of plato and the cartesian
  • 00:01:29
    tradition the tradition of western
  • 00:01:30
    rationalism and idealism
  • 00:01:32
    you will be on the right track at the
  • 00:01:33
    very least
  • 00:01:35
    now like descartes what husserl wished
  • 00:01:37
    to do was to construct a new foundation
  • 00:01:40
    for knowledge
  • 00:01:41
    it's a radical epistemological move
  • 00:01:43
    which attempts to create
  • 00:01:45
    certainty in the face of contingency and
  • 00:01:48
    the uncertainty that is generated by the
  • 00:01:50
    other realms of knowledge
  • 00:01:51
    so in some way respects perhaps like
  • 00:01:53
    kant what husserl's project involves
  • 00:01:56
    is finding a presuppositionless
  • 00:01:58
    foundation
  • 00:01:59
    to human knowledge and what this would
  • 00:02:01
    be is a sort of science of sciences
  • 00:02:03
    that would inform and direct and correct
  • 00:02:06
    all the other activities of the human
  • 00:02:08
    mind including natural science
  • 00:02:10
    so what horseroll is trying to do is get
  • 00:02:12
    down to the urs stuff
  • 00:02:13
    the bedrock of the human psyche and from
  • 00:02:16
    there to generate
  • 00:02:17
    all the other realms of knowledge which
  • 00:02:20
    correspond to it
  • 00:02:21
    in some respects this is like the
  • 00:02:23
    cartesian product project
  • 00:02:24
    of looking into oneself and after
  • 00:02:27
    finding an
  • 00:02:28
    indubitable foundation for that and for
  • 00:02:30
    the contents of your mind
  • 00:02:32
    to move from there to generating the
  • 00:02:34
    external world
  • 00:02:35
    so like descartes husserl is working on
  • 00:02:38
    the assumption
  • 00:02:38
    that first of all the self is
  • 00:02:40
    self-evident
  • 00:02:42
    right it's in other words it's not
  • 00:02:43
    controversial that we ourselves that we
  • 00:02:44
    have selves that we are conscious
  • 00:02:46
    he takes that to be simply a given and
  • 00:02:49
    that that is indubitable
  • 00:02:50
    and not only is that indubitable the
  • 00:02:51
    interesting thing about it is that the
  • 00:02:53
    knowing
  • 00:02:54
    self the kagito is in his earl's view
  • 00:02:57
    both temporally and logically prior to
  • 00:03:00
    the world that's known by the kagito in
  • 00:03:02
    other words the knower comes before the
  • 00:03:03
    known
  • 00:03:04
    right that has to come first and if you
  • 00:03:05
    think about the idealist tradition all
  • 00:03:07
    these guys believe that
  • 00:03:08
    think about descartes think about uh
  • 00:03:11
    spinoza think about uh
  • 00:03:13
    kant the whole idealist or rationalist
  • 00:03:15
    tradition tends to emphasize inwardness
  • 00:03:18
    in turn internality and perhaps that's
  • 00:03:20
    the most not only
  • 00:03:21
    an important characteristic of facial
  • 00:03:22
    but i would be inclined to say that
  • 00:03:23
    that's one of the most
  • 00:03:24
    characteristic moves the characteristic
  • 00:03:27
    intellectual deployments
  • 00:03:28
    of continental philosophy in other words
  • 00:03:30
    unlike the anglo-american tradition
  • 00:03:32
    which looks outward like hume and
  • 00:03:35
    develops a theory of
  • 00:03:36
    the external world and then afterwards
  • 00:03:38
    as a sort of postscript to that activity
  • 00:03:40
    develops a theory of the psyche of the
  • 00:03:42
    mind of what's internal to a human being
  • 00:03:45
    well the continental tradition does the
  • 00:03:46
    opposite they start out with a theory of
  • 00:03:48
    what's inside
  • 00:03:49
    and then from there they try and work
  • 00:03:50
    outwards and both the anglo-american
  • 00:03:53
    tradition and the continental tradition
  • 00:03:54
    suffer from a sort of common problem
  • 00:03:56
    when they try and make the jump from one
  • 00:03:59
    realm the exterior what we might call
  • 00:04:00
    the exochasm
  • 00:04:02
    to the what the internal realm the
  • 00:04:03
    psyche the soul or
  • 00:04:05
    the mind or what i call the intracosm
  • 00:04:08
    there's always a problem in making and
  • 00:04:09
    leaping that hurdle and it doesn't
  • 00:04:11
    really matter which side you start on
  • 00:04:12
    the problem is always going to be the
  • 00:04:13
    same how do we
  • 00:04:14
    move from one part of the hurdle to the
  • 00:04:15
    other how do we move from the beginning
  • 00:04:16
    to the end
  • 00:04:18
    so when you look at husserl when you
  • 00:04:20
    look at this this uh
  • 00:04:21
    cartesian continental tradition keep
  • 00:04:23
    that in mind they're starting out with a
  • 00:04:25
    in with the internal facts of human
  • 00:04:26
    consciousness and generating the world
  • 00:04:28
    from that
  • 00:04:29
    okay so it's a different problematic a
  • 00:04:31
    different starting point and that's what
  • 00:04:33
    you
  • 00:04:33
    keep in mind when you look at hussurl
  • 00:04:36
    now corresponding to this
  • 00:04:40
    way of developing a philosophy is
  • 00:04:43
    the hope of getting certain knowledge
  • 00:04:45
    like descartes descartes's whole project
  • 00:04:47
    of radical skepticism was to develop a
  • 00:04:49
    knowledge that was foundational and
  • 00:04:50
    completely certain
  • 00:04:51
    who cyril is trying to do the same thing
  • 00:04:52
    he's a sort of neo-cartesian
  • 00:04:54
    and much of his work when you actually
  • 00:04:56
    start to read the stuff that he's
  • 00:04:57
    published because
  • 00:04:58
    um although he produced a tremendous
  • 00:05:00
    amount of writing
  • 00:05:01
    most of what he produced was not
  • 00:05:03
    published in his lifetime and he was in
  • 00:05:05
    a voluminous writing produced almost
  • 00:05:06
    45 000 pages of work and it tends to be
  • 00:05:10
    very repetitive it is methodological for
  • 00:05:12
    the most part and particularly
  • 00:05:13
    programmatic in other words what his
  • 00:05:16
    writings are about
  • 00:05:17
    is how we engage in a method which he
  • 00:05:19
    calls phenomenology
  • 00:05:20
    which will allow us to discern these
  • 00:05:22
    eternal essences
  • 00:05:24
    that exist within the human psyche and
  • 00:05:26
    once we identify these essences then we
  • 00:05:27
    will know ourselves
  • 00:05:28
    and once we know ourselves clearly and
  • 00:05:30
    in a way that can't be doubted that
  • 00:05:32
    can't be called into question
  • 00:05:34
    then and only then can we construct all
  • 00:05:35
    the other elements of knowledge
  • 00:05:37
    so what he wants is what he described as
  • 00:05:39
    philosophy is a rigorous science
  • 00:05:41
    which is a very radical sort of an idea
  • 00:05:43
    i mean by the 20th century i think very
  • 00:05:44
    few thinkers are willing to say that
  • 00:05:46
    philosophy is not only a rigorous
  • 00:05:47
    science but it's the foundation the the
  • 00:05:49
    or knowledge of all other possible
  • 00:05:51
    cognition so this is a long
  • 00:05:55
    it's it's a play that tries to go for
  • 00:05:56
    all the marbles he's trying to win
  • 00:05:58
    the big philosophical game and if he
  • 00:06:00
    fails to do that and i think that he
  • 00:06:02
    does
  • 00:06:02
    and i think that his project is a
  • 00:06:03
    failure i think that we have to admire
  • 00:06:05
    the sort of
  • 00:06:06
    nobility which tries to take on a huge
  • 00:06:08
    intellectual project like that
  • 00:06:09
    in many respects because visceral
  • 00:06:11
    himself as a man rather than as a
  • 00:06:12
    philosopher was a kind of a saintly
  • 00:06:14
    individual
  • 00:06:15
    he was conspicuous for his dedication
  • 00:06:17
    and his devotion and his moral
  • 00:06:18
    seriousness to philosophy
  • 00:06:20
    i would almost be tempted to compare him
  • 00:06:22
    to sort of a don quixote of philosophy
  • 00:06:25
    we all laugh at the results or of don
  • 00:06:27
    quixote's misadventures because well
  • 00:06:29
    they're silly and he misunderstands the
  • 00:06:30
    way the world works but on the other
  • 00:06:32
    hand
  • 00:06:32
    no one laughs at don quixote's
  • 00:06:33
    intentions they are intrinsically noble
  • 00:06:36
    and we
  • 00:06:38
    we cannot we have no choice but to
  • 00:06:39
    admire that i kind of feel that way
  • 00:06:41
    about husserl
  • 00:06:42
    i think that the project well not only
  • 00:06:44
    does it not complete itself it nearly
  • 00:06:45
    never completely gets started and it's
  • 00:06:48
    probably impossible to do
  • 00:06:49
    but i sort of admire the idea of
  • 00:06:52
    unifying all of knowledge
  • 00:06:53
    it is a sort of quest for the holy grail
  • 00:06:56
    and even if we never find it there is
  • 00:06:57
    something excellent about the quest
  • 00:06:59
    so and i say this initially in my
  • 00:07:01
    treatment for soil because i'm going to
  • 00:07:02
    be kind of hard on him a little later on
  • 00:07:04
    so without being too hard i think that
  • 00:07:06
    we should give
  • 00:07:07
    him a little bit of slack because he's
  • 00:07:08
    trying to do something that if it's not
  • 00:07:11
    impossible is certainly
  • 00:07:12
    exceedingly difficult much more
  • 00:07:15
    ambitious than the local
  • 00:07:16
    small individual project projects
  • 00:07:19
    characteristic of the anglo-american
  • 00:07:21
    tradition now
  • 00:07:23
    first off he starts out with the idea of
  • 00:07:24
    certainty and intuition in other words
  • 00:07:26
    if we're going to examine ourselves in a
  • 00:07:28
    phenomenological way if we're going to
  • 00:07:29
    pursue this method of phenomenology
  • 00:07:33
    we're going to have to find out well
  • 00:07:36
    what the standard or what the procedure
  • 00:07:37
    for knowing things is i mean what
  • 00:07:39
    phenomenology involves as a method
  • 00:07:41
    what it investigates and how it
  • 00:07:43
    investigates it those are always all
  • 00:07:44
    going to be informed and since this is a
  • 00:07:46
    methodological project
  • 00:07:48
    right it makes sense to to talk about
  • 00:07:50
    how we do this as opposed to what we
  • 00:07:52
    as opposed to what we do and the big one
  • 00:07:54
    of the big issues here is the question
  • 00:07:56
    of intuition
  • 00:07:57
    now i guess perhaps when you hear me use
  • 00:08:00
    a word like intuition
  • 00:08:02
    particularly because we live in
  • 00:08:02
    contemporary america we are in the
  • 00:08:04
    thrall of the anglo-american tradition
  • 00:08:07
    you perhaps think that i should put that
  • 00:08:08
    on italics because intuition is a kind
  • 00:08:10
    of fishy kind of mushy
  • 00:08:12
    kind of messy sort of a category and i
  • 00:08:14
    want to start out suggesting that that's
  • 00:08:15
    not the case
  • 00:08:16
    and that in fact it might be true some
  • 00:08:18
    of the time but i can imagine intuitions
  • 00:08:20
    and i'm going to help you imagine some
  • 00:08:21
    intuitions
  • 00:08:22
    which are not only not controversial but
  • 00:08:24
    they're not mushy and they're really not
  • 00:08:25
    doubtable
  • 00:08:26
    here's some ideas let me ask you some
  • 00:08:27
    questions i have a studio audience here
  • 00:08:29
    which is live and it kind of helps me
  • 00:08:30
    out
  • 00:08:31
    um i'd like your information or your
  • 00:08:33
    answers to these questions first of all
  • 00:08:34
    do i have a headache you don't know
  • 00:08:37
    and how about do i hope someday to be
  • 00:08:39
    elected president
  • 00:08:41
    you don't know do i like spinach you
  • 00:08:43
    don't know
  • 00:08:44
    my point is is that i can answer these
  • 00:08:46
    questions even though you can't i know
  • 00:08:48
    if i have a headache or not
  • 00:08:50
    and what would somebody else external to
  • 00:08:51
    me presume to tell me that no i don't
  • 00:08:53
    have a headache
  • 00:08:54
    you're going to correct me on that
  • 00:08:55
    matter no of course it's silly
  • 00:08:57
    right well may i suggest that my
  • 00:08:59
    knowledge of my headache is a direct
  • 00:09:00
    intuition of my
  • 00:09:02
    experience my psychic state right and i
  • 00:09:05
    don't need anybody else to help me out
  • 00:09:06
    here and if you if you doubt that you
  • 00:09:09
    say no mike you don't have a headache
  • 00:09:10
    what am i supposed to do do some math
  • 00:09:12
    and show you that i do or should we go
  • 00:09:14
    to the lab and will i do some
  • 00:09:15
    experiments and show you that i have a
  • 00:09:16
    headache
  • 00:09:16
    can you see why that project is silly
  • 00:09:18
    and we wouldn't gesture something
  • 00:09:20
    external to my experience of the world
  • 00:09:22
    in order to validate the proposition
  • 00:09:23
    that i have a headache
  • 00:09:25
    intuition then perhaps is not so gooey
  • 00:09:27
    as we might imagine there are certain
  • 00:09:29
    things
  • 00:09:30
    which we validate just by gesturing at
  • 00:09:33
    our experience of them
  • 00:09:34
    in that respect oddly enough
  • 00:09:36
    phenomenology husserl's method
  • 00:09:38
    and empiricism the method of somebody
  • 00:09:39
    like david hume
  • 00:09:41
    even though they are so different in
  • 00:09:42
    many respects share a common property is
  • 00:09:44
    that they're all ultimately based on our
  • 00:09:45
    experience
  • 00:09:46
    hume's phenomenalism his empiricism is
  • 00:09:49
    based on our
  • 00:09:50
    on our experience of the external world
  • 00:09:52
    observing it
  • 00:09:54
    husserl's phenomenology alternatively is
  • 00:09:56
    based on our experience of the internal
  • 00:09:58
    world
  • 00:09:59
    and it reduces only to that and there's
  • 00:10:01
    nothing further that we can gesture at
  • 00:10:04
    so on the one hand i would recommend
  • 00:10:06
    that you
  • 00:10:07
    look at this with a certain degree of
  • 00:10:08
    skepticism in other words
  • 00:10:10
    intuition can be a very fishy category
  • 00:10:12
    it can be nebulous
  • 00:10:13
    and it can be a simple refusal to give
  • 00:10:15
    reasons for what you believe
  • 00:10:17
    and usually the refusal to give a reason
  • 00:10:19
    philosophically for what you believe
  • 00:10:20
    is a way of saying that you don't have a
  • 00:10:22
    reason for what you believe but my point
  • 00:10:24
    is that that's not always the case if
  • 00:10:25
    you think about the idea of intuition
  • 00:10:27
    in terms of questions like do i have a
  • 00:10:28
    headache i believe you will realize that
  • 00:10:30
    i'm the only one who knows that and that
  • 00:10:32
    it's not absurd or meaningless for me to
  • 00:10:33
    say that i have a headache
  • 00:10:35
    all right so i'm just trying to
  • 00:10:36
    establish the idea of intuition as not
  • 00:10:38
    being intrinsically preposterous
  • 00:10:40
    all right now churceurl was a student of
  • 00:10:44
    brentano which is an interesting fact
  • 00:10:46
    because freud was also one of brentano's
  • 00:10:47
    students
  • 00:10:48
    and from brentano apparently a very
  • 00:10:49
    influential teacher
  • 00:10:51
    he borrowed as freud did the idea of
  • 00:10:53
    intentionality
  • 00:10:54
    and that's revolves around the
  • 00:10:56
    proposition that the
  • 00:10:58
    facts of mental life of our psychic life
  • 00:11:00
    are irreducible
  • 00:11:01
    in other words we can't talk about love
  • 00:11:03
    and hate and hope and guilt and lust
  • 00:11:05
    in terms of chemicals freud liked the
  • 00:11:07
    idea that ultimately we could reduce one
  • 00:11:09
    to the other but
  • 00:11:10
    in practice he treated it as a sort of
  • 00:11:12
    autonomous inquiry into the mind
  • 00:11:14
    well something analogous is happening
  • 00:11:17
    when we look at hussurl
  • 00:11:18
    he believes that the facts of mental
  • 00:11:20
    life are irreducible and they're real
  • 00:11:23
    and not only are they irreducible and
  • 00:11:24
    real but they come first in other words
  • 00:11:26
    what hussuro wants to do is like that is
  • 00:11:28
    like the project of descartes
  • 00:11:30
    he wants to construct the self first and
  • 00:11:32
    out of that build nature
  • 00:11:34
    rather than say the uh the empiricist
  • 00:11:36
    project of constructing nature first and
  • 00:11:37
    then
  • 00:11:38
    later on constructing the self so the
  • 00:11:40
    self comes first and how do you find out
  • 00:11:42
    about yourself
  • 00:11:43
    intuition right and the reason why it's
  • 00:11:45
    important for me to establish intuition
  • 00:11:46
    is because elsewhere this seems like a
  • 00:11:48
    tremendously nebulous and sort of
  • 00:11:49
    baggy activity but in fact it
  • 00:11:52
    potentially could be
  • 00:11:53
    more precise than one might immediately
  • 00:11:55
    imagine
  • 00:11:59
    now what's the problem josuril wants to
  • 00:12:01
    solve
  • 00:12:02
    well in one of his most accessible books
  • 00:12:04
    and if you intend to read husserl which
  • 00:12:06
    can be quite trying
  • 00:12:07
    i would recommend you try a philosophy
  • 00:12:10
    in the crisis of european man it's one
  • 00:12:12
    of his last works it's written in 30
  • 00:12:13
    it's published in 36 it's written in the
  • 00:12:14
    30s
  • 00:12:15
    and he dies in 38 and
  • 00:12:19
    the reason why that's a good
  • 00:12:20
    introduction to husserl is because it's
  • 00:12:22
    easier to figure out what husserl is
  • 00:12:23
    against
  • 00:12:24
    than it is to figure out who searles is
  • 00:12:25
    for and what he's against are things
  • 00:12:28
    like
  • 00:12:28
    historicism relativism psychologism
  • 00:12:32
    scientism and what he's gesturing at
  • 00:12:35
    here is the whole
  • 00:12:36
    tendency of thought since the
  • 00:12:39
    enlightenment
  • 00:12:39
    which tends to move away from
  • 00:12:41
    theological or more precisely
  • 00:12:42
    metaphysical structures
  • 00:12:44
    towards an emphasis on the empirical
  • 00:12:45
    external world
  • 00:12:47
    perhaps this is a homage to the rise of
  • 00:12:49
    modern natural science but hussurl says
  • 00:12:51
    that the rise of modern natural science
  • 00:12:53
    has misled us
  • 00:12:54
    has caused us to misunderstand the world
  • 00:12:56
    around us
  • 00:12:57
    and has put philosophy on the wrong
  • 00:12:59
    footing the result of this
  • 00:13:00
    has been an impoverishment of our
  • 00:13:02
    culture in some ways i would say that
  • 00:13:04
    husserl's concerns are fundamentally
  • 00:13:07
    cultural
  • 00:13:07
    he's putting together this epistle this
  • 00:13:09
    epistemological project
  • 00:13:11
    in order to rescue us from the
  • 00:13:13
    degeneration into a sort of pure
  • 00:13:15
    materialism
  • 00:13:16
    what cyril thinks at least visceral
  • 00:13:18
    self-conception is
  • 00:13:19
    that what he's doing is renewing and
  • 00:13:22
    reviving
  • 00:13:23
    the platonic and aristotelian tradition
  • 00:13:25
    of greek rationalism
  • 00:13:26
    where our logos our rationality applies
  • 00:13:28
    to the whole domain of human experience
  • 00:13:31
    let us juxtapose that to the tradition
  • 00:13:34
    of scientism that we see in mark and
  • 00:13:35
    avenarius and
  • 00:13:36
    all those positivistic germans um there
  • 00:13:39
    he calls that the
  • 00:13:40
    the tradition of democritus those of you
  • 00:13:41
    who know the pr the uh
  • 00:13:43
    the greek philosopher democratise will
  • 00:13:44
    know that he reduced the world to adams
  • 00:13:46
    in the void
  • 00:13:47
    well in some ways that's what modern
  • 00:13:48
    scientific project has done and who
  • 00:13:50
    cyril says that is a wrong turn we have
  • 00:13:52
    moved down an intellectual cul-de-sac
  • 00:13:53
    there
  • 00:13:54
    so what he's trying to say is that we
  • 00:13:56
    must go back to ourselves it's very
  • 00:13:57
    interesting to know about the things in
  • 00:13:59
    the world external to us
  • 00:14:00
    but the real important thing is for us
  • 00:14:01
    to know ourselves and once we know
  • 00:14:03
    ourselves then we will be able to
  • 00:14:04
    construct
  • 00:14:05
    our ex our knowledge of the external
  • 00:14:06
    world on an individual foundation
  • 00:14:08
    but if we start with the external world
  • 00:14:10
    and its contingency and its messiness
  • 00:14:12
    and its lack of certainty all our other
  • 00:14:15
    intellectual activities
  • 00:14:16
    including our knowledge of ourself is
  • 00:14:17
    going to reflect that same contingency
  • 00:14:19
    and uncertainty
  • 00:14:20
    so while the project may not be entirely
  • 00:14:22
    successful the
  • 00:14:23
    the problem that he's formulating is in
  • 00:14:26
    fact reasonable and serious and ought to
  • 00:14:27
    be taken
  • 00:14:28
    with great care so we're going to move
  • 00:14:31
    against
  • 00:14:32
    uh the general tendency of western
  • 00:14:34
    culture since the breakup of the middle
  • 00:14:36
    ages
  • 00:14:37
    there is a decidedly scholastic element
  • 00:14:39
    to husserl's work as well
  • 00:14:41
    and infinite working out of carefully
  • 00:14:43
    constructed logical
  • 00:14:44
    oppositions in a sort of tautological
  • 00:14:47
    way
  • 00:14:48
    the construction of elaborate
  • 00:14:49
    tautologies is perhaps one of the
  • 00:14:50
    characteristic philosophical problems of
  • 00:14:52
    mathematicians who eventually become
  • 00:14:54
    philosophers what were they doing when
  • 00:14:56
    in their training constructing
  • 00:14:57
    tautologies and working out the
  • 00:14:58
    implications of definitions
  • 00:14:59
    well that's what husserl's whole project
  • 00:15:01
    is is that he moves from the domain of
  • 00:15:03
    space
  • 00:15:04
    or quantity to the whole domain of human
  • 00:15:08
    experience
  • 00:15:09
    so a noble and exciting project let's
  • 00:15:12
    dive into it and see if we can make some
  • 00:15:14
    sort of sense out of it
  • 00:15:16
    husserl is worried right when he's
  • 00:15:17
    writing philosophy and the crisis of
  • 00:15:19
    european man let's think about his
  • 00:15:21
    context
  • 00:15:23
    he was a professor at the university of
  • 00:15:24
    freiburg until 1933
  • 00:15:26
    when he was dismissed from his post
  • 00:15:28
    because he was a jew right national
  • 00:15:29
    socialism comes in and he gets replaced
  • 00:15:31
    by one of his students martin heidegger
  • 00:15:34
    and at that time it seems clear enough
  • 00:15:36
    to husserl that western culture is
  • 00:15:38
    collapsing one of the results
  • 00:15:40
    of this democratian tradition as opposed
  • 00:15:42
    to the
  • 00:15:43
    revive platonic aristotelian tradition
  • 00:15:46
    is that the fact value distinction
  • 00:15:48
    emerges
  • 00:15:49
    we get various kinds of relativisms we
  • 00:15:51
    get various kinds of will to power
  • 00:15:53
    philosophies all of these according to
  • 00:15:55
    husserl are a sign of cultural
  • 00:15:56
    degeneration
  • 00:15:57
    and the source of this cultural
  • 00:15:59
    degeneration is our lack of knowledge of
  • 00:16:01
    ourselves and the
  • 00:16:01
    world around us so what he's trying to
  • 00:16:03
    do is sort of
  • 00:16:05
    like ajax i don't know if you know the
  • 00:16:07
    the iliad but ajax preventing
  • 00:16:09
    the trojans from burning the greek ships
  • 00:16:11
    he stands there and will not move
  • 00:16:13
    and there is something tremendously
  • 00:16:14
    heroic about it even though he may be
  • 00:16:16
    fighting phantom
  • 00:16:17
    battles all right he thinks at least
  • 00:16:20
    that what he's doing
  • 00:16:21
    is absolutely essential to the project
  • 00:16:22
    of our culture
  • 00:16:24
    and the problem that we're going to find
  • 00:16:26
    one of the problems we're going to find
  • 00:16:27
    in this procedure of looking into
  • 00:16:28
    ourselves is that it could easily become
  • 00:16:30
    frivolous or arbitrary in other words
  • 00:16:32
    once i look into myself i suppose i
  • 00:16:34
    could tell you the immediate
  • 00:16:36
    contents of my experience but the
  • 00:16:39
    problem is that that would be arbitrary
  • 00:16:40
    and completely subjective that's not
  • 00:16:42
    going to give us an ultimate foundation
  • 00:16:43
    so we have to do something with our
  • 00:16:45
    looking into ourselves with our turning
  • 00:16:46
    inward and what her sorrow wants to do
  • 00:16:49
    is use a method for examining the
  • 00:16:52
    contents of our psyche and that method
  • 00:16:54
    will be called phenomenology
  • 00:16:55
    what he will do is something called the
  • 00:16:56
    epoche which which is a
  • 00:16:59
    translation of the idea of suspension
  • 00:17:02
    like descartes
  • 00:17:03
    when he says i'm going to doubt the
  • 00:17:04
    whole external world what sorrow wants
  • 00:17:06
    to do is first of all
  • 00:17:07
    suspend the whole external world now
  • 00:17:09
    it's not that he just believes in it in
  • 00:17:11
    other words he's not being skeptical of
  • 00:17:12
    the existence of tables and chairs the
  • 00:17:14
    way descartes did in the discourse on
  • 00:17:15
    method
  • 00:17:16
    he's not denying their existence he's
  • 00:17:17
    just saying that the whole external
  • 00:17:18
    world is irrelevant
  • 00:17:20
    bracketed right in a strict mathematical
  • 00:17:22
    sense of bracketing a problem because
  • 00:17:24
    remember he had his training as a
  • 00:17:25
    mathematician so we're going to bracket
  • 00:17:27
    the problem of the external world
  • 00:17:28
    and leave out all that stuff all right
  • 00:17:31
    and bracketing the external world means
  • 00:17:32
    that we're going to
  • 00:17:33
    leave out a great deal of human
  • 00:17:34
    experience for example
  • 00:17:36
    um this will leave out things like uh
  • 00:17:39
    cause and effect relationships why
  • 00:17:41
    because as yume points out
  • 00:17:42
    we don't see cause and effect in the
  • 00:17:43
    world we just see one thing happening
  • 00:17:45
    after another
  • 00:17:46
    all scientific theorems will be left out
  • 00:17:48
    mathematical deductions will be left out
  • 00:17:50
    we're going to be left with the pure raw
  • 00:17:52
    data of being a human being
  • 00:17:54
    and what swirl thinks is that there's
  • 00:17:56
    something common to all of us
  • 00:17:58
    that we're going to discern there you
  • 00:17:59
    might think of it as something like this
  • 00:18:01
    um you know what uh what it is to sift
  • 00:18:03
    out sand to look for something hidden in
  • 00:18:04
    this in sand
  • 00:18:05
    what he's trying to do is sift out the
  • 00:18:07
    contents of human experience
  • 00:18:09
    and find out the stuff that doesn't pass
  • 00:18:11
    through the mesh of phenomenology
  • 00:18:12
    what gets help what we hold on to there
  • 00:18:14
    will be what sorel calls an essence
  • 00:18:17
    some invariable necessary quality
  • 00:18:20
    to human experience and when we collect
  • 00:18:22
    these essences together
  • 00:18:24
    and reduce them still further i think
  • 00:18:27
    what we will get is some common ore
  • 00:18:28
    stuff of the human psyche
  • 00:18:30
    okay um also think of the idea of
  • 00:18:32
    reduction reduction is a funny word
  • 00:18:34
    um from latin it means to lead back
  • 00:18:37
    we're going to be led back to our
  • 00:18:39
    original
  • 00:18:40
    kind of primal consciousness another way
  • 00:18:42
    of thinking of reduction would be the
  • 00:18:43
    idea of boiling down
  • 00:18:44
    imagine the consciousness is a big whale
  • 00:18:46
    and you've got to put it in a pot and
  • 00:18:47
    boil away all the stuff that's
  • 00:18:48
    irrelevant so that you can get to
  • 00:18:50
    something that's essential and
  • 00:18:51
    structural and permanent there
  • 00:18:52
    and this longing for something essential
  • 00:18:54
    and structural and permanent
  • 00:18:56
    can't you hear the ghost of plato here
  • 00:18:59
    right and it's a typical it's the
  • 00:19:00
    typical intellectual move of somebody
  • 00:19:02
    that's been trained in mathematics
  • 00:19:04
    all right and this has had a tremendous
  • 00:19:06
    influence on
  • 00:19:08
    the subsequent development of
  • 00:19:09
    continental philosophy particularly
  • 00:19:10
    people like heidegger
  • 00:19:13
    now in the process of developing this
  • 00:19:15
    presuppositionless philosophy
  • 00:19:17
    what we're going to find out is
  • 00:19:18
    something like the shape
  • 00:19:20
    of the ego's transparent cage
  • 00:19:24
    like kant he's going to tell us what the
  • 00:19:26
    necessary limitations
  • 00:19:28
    of our experience are and once he's done
  • 00:19:31
    that he will think that he has done it
  • 00:19:32
    permanently for all of time in the way
  • 00:19:34
    that any mathematician would
  • 00:19:39
    now the problem is to find some certain
  • 00:19:42
    knowledge with which to combat
  • 00:19:43
    historicism that we get in delta
  • 00:19:46
    or scientism that we get the positivists
  • 00:19:48
    or various kinds of relativism
  • 00:19:50
    and the way we're going to do that is by
  • 00:19:52
    boiling down with this epoche
  • 00:19:55
    and in the first case what we'll do is
  • 00:19:57
    we will have a sort of purified
  • 00:19:59
    subjectivity we will boil it down until
  • 00:20:01
    we get to the
  • 00:20:01
    essential constructs from which human
  • 00:20:04
    minds are made
  • 00:20:05
    and the result will be that authentic
  • 00:20:07
    reality will be disclosed we're going to
  • 00:20:09
    suspend our belief in the external world
  • 00:20:10
    and just examine what's left over
  • 00:20:12
    and what's left over after we perform
  • 00:20:14
    this kind of a an activity of reduction
  • 00:20:17
    will be uh these essences that are
  • 00:20:21
    permanent and eternal
  • 00:20:22
    and he will know then the structure of
  • 00:20:24
    the human mind and these will always be
  • 00:20:26
    they will always have a certain
  • 00:20:27
    similar similar set of characteristics
  • 00:20:30
    and
  • 00:20:31
    phenomenological statements will result
  • 00:20:33
    from this phenomenological
  • 00:20:34
    phenomenological examination of the
  • 00:20:36
    internal contents of our psyche
  • 00:20:38
    and the key thing here is that it's not
  • 00:20:40
    empirical in the sense that i can
  • 00:20:42
    observe that and have it be an empirical
  • 00:20:44
    activity it will be
  • 00:20:46
    descriptive but it won't describe
  • 00:20:47
    anything out there it's going to
  • 00:20:48
    describe exclusively the stuff that's in
  • 00:20:50
    here
  • 00:20:51
    all right so it's going to be a
  • 00:20:52
    descriptive theory of the
  • 00:20:54
    intro cosm all right and what he's
  • 00:20:57
    looking for is absolute certainty
  • 00:20:59
    without presuppositions and it will
  • 00:21:01
    always be about
  • 00:21:02
    internal intentional actions what he's
  • 00:21:05
    trying to do here
  • 00:21:06
    is derive a priori statements and what
  • 00:21:09
    remember
  • 00:21:09
    if you remember kant what an a priori
  • 00:21:11
    statement is it has at least two
  • 00:21:12
    qualities
  • 00:21:13
    one it's non-empirical and two it's
  • 00:21:15
    necessarily true
  • 00:21:17
    so what he wants to find is to generate
  • 00:21:18
    after looking into his own psyche in
  • 00:21:20
    this phenomenological way
  • 00:21:21
    sifting out the contingent and the
  • 00:21:23
    arbitrary and the irrelevant
  • 00:21:25
    is a priori certain truths about what it
  • 00:21:27
    means to be a human being
  • 00:21:29
    can't do boralus once again now the
  • 00:21:32
    problem
  • 00:21:33
    you might want to say that after this
  • 00:21:34
    reduction what we're getting
  • 00:21:36
    is something like immediate direct
  • 00:21:38
    apprehension of what the scholastic is
  • 00:21:40
    called universals
  • 00:21:42
    right we're looking directly into the
  • 00:21:44
    self and since the self constructs and
  • 00:21:45
    projects the world
  • 00:21:46
    we're going to do is cogitate ourselves
  • 00:21:48
    and bootstrap ourselves into some
  • 00:21:50
    permanent reality now there are many
  • 00:21:53
    difficulties with this
  • 00:21:54
    um some of them we should look at
  • 00:21:57
    directly first of all there are very few
  • 00:21:58
    examples in historical's work of
  • 00:22:00
    actually doing this
  • 00:22:01
    one of the problems with phenomenology
  • 00:22:03
    the nebulous bag equality about it
  • 00:22:05
    is that he says that the first thing we
  • 00:22:07
    have to do is figure out what the
  • 00:22:08
    phenomenological method is
  • 00:22:10
    and the way we develop the
  • 00:22:11
    phenomenological method is to use
  • 00:22:13
    phenomenology on itself
  • 00:22:15
    to inspect yourself so there's something
  • 00:22:16
    kind of fishy going on here
  • 00:22:18
    in order to find out what a phenomenon
  • 00:22:20
    is remember in greek phenomenon is that
  • 00:22:21
    which is disclosed
  • 00:22:23
    that which is apparent and directly
  • 00:22:24
    known well in order to find out what a
  • 00:22:26
    phenomenon is one of the things we're
  • 00:22:28
    going to do is reduce the idea of the
  • 00:22:29
    phenomenon
  • 00:22:30
    to find out what that essentially is and
  • 00:22:31
    from there we'll be able to move
  • 00:22:32
    directly on
  • 00:22:33
    so it's a method that hopes to pull
  • 00:22:35
    itself up by its bootstraps and i have
  • 00:22:36
    some problems logically with this
  • 00:22:38
    activity
  • 00:22:39
    let me give you some examples to kind of
  • 00:22:41
    flesh this out make this a little bit
  • 00:22:42
    easier to concretely think about
  • 00:22:45
    and uh husserl himself was generating
  • 00:22:48
    things like
  • 00:22:49
    investigations of phenomenon but also
  • 00:22:51
    ideas like number
  • 00:22:52
    meaning truth pure abstractions
  • 00:22:55
    that he believes are common to all
  • 00:22:58
    cognitive beings
  • 00:22:59
    and in every case we end up with some
  • 00:23:02
    sort of a circle
  • 00:23:03
    what he calls the epistemological circle
  • 00:23:04
    and other times the methodological
  • 00:23:06
    circle
  • 00:23:06
    the reasoning always ends up being
  • 00:23:08
    circle but of course if you're going to
  • 00:23:10
    restrict yourself to the domain of
  • 00:23:11
    internality
  • 00:23:12
    what else could you be doing but talking
  • 00:23:14
    about circular things in a circular way
  • 00:23:16
    where is there to go it's almost not
  • 00:23:18
    even a circle it's something like a
  • 00:23:19
    point
  • 00:23:20
    it doesn't it almost lacks that interior
  • 00:23:22
    quality um
  • 00:23:23
    and his method or the method that he
  • 00:23:25
    uses more often than any other because
  • 00:23:27
    it's very difficult to figure out
  • 00:23:28
    exactly what this amounts to
  • 00:23:30
    is what he calls free imaginative
  • 00:23:32
    variation let's see what that's like
  • 00:23:34
    that's how we search for essences and
  • 00:23:36
    what we're going to do is think of
  • 00:23:38
    something let's take a human being
  • 00:23:40
    that's something i'm going to do a
  • 00:23:40
    phenomenological reduction i'm going to
  • 00:23:42
    think about that problem now
  • 00:23:43
    cogitating with me all right all right
  • 00:23:45
    let's give this a shot
  • 00:23:47
    um what we're going to do is attribute
  • 00:23:49
    predicates to this thing
  • 00:23:50
    human being and then add and subtract
  • 00:23:52
    them in our imagination
  • 00:23:54
    and see which of them which of these
  • 00:23:56
    predicates we believe we can dispense
  • 00:23:57
    with and which we believe we cannot
  • 00:23:59
    dispense with
  • 00:24:00
    we will and then we'll make two
  • 00:24:01
    categories the ones we can dispense with
  • 00:24:03
    which are the contingent things we're
  • 00:24:04
    trying to get rid of that's the sand
  • 00:24:06
    we're sifting away and the things we
  • 00:24:07
    can't dispense with which is which are
  • 00:24:08
    the essences and that's what we're
  • 00:24:10
    looking for
  • 00:24:10
    let me give you an example is it true
  • 00:24:13
    that we
  • 00:24:14
    we necessarily have to attach the
  • 00:24:15
    following predicate to the human mind
  • 00:24:17
    that the human mind is
  • 00:24:18
    good at math is that true of every human
  • 00:24:20
    mind no i
  • 00:24:22
    i'm bad at math i mean i know for a fact
  • 00:24:24
    that it's not true of every human eye
  • 00:24:25
    i'm no good at math
  • 00:24:26
    let's try another one the human mind
  • 00:24:27
    forgets birthdays
  • 00:24:29
    well that's a predicate but some of you
  • 00:24:31
    might remember birthdays
  • 00:24:32
    how about this one the human mind is
  • 00:24:34
    self-conscious
  • 00:24:36
    do you think you could dispense with
  • 00:24:37
    that no i mean it's built right into the
  • 00:24:40
    idea of what we mean by being a human
  • 00:24:42
    mind
  • 00:24:43
    all right so what we're doing here is
  • 00:24:45
    attributing
  • 00:24:46
    a great number of predicates one of the
  • 00:24:48
    great problems here is it seems to me
  • 00:24:49
    there are an infinite number of
  • 00:24:49
    predicates and we're never going to get
  • 00:24:50
    uh we're never
  • 00:24:51
    going to finish the first thing we try
  • 00:24:52
    and reduce much less do all the other
  • 00:24:54
    reductions that are going to be
  • 00:24:55
    necessary to
  • 00:24:56
    engage in this project but what at least
  • 00:24:58
    this is an instantiation of what the guy
  • 00:25:00
    is trying to do
  • 00:25:01
    to separate the necessary from the
  • 00:25:02
    unnecessary or the inessential from the
  • 00:25:04
    essential predicates and once you have
  • 00:25:06
    the whole list of essential predicates
  • 00:25:07
    of a thing
  • 00:25:08
    now you know what it is and then you get
  • 00:25:10
    these things that are defined now
  • 00:25:11
    as their essences right just the
  • 00:25:13
    essential predicates and then we start
  • 00:25:14
    to
  • 00:25:14
    boil that down again and you keep on
  • 00:25:16
    boiling until you get to
  • 00:25:18
    complete disclosure of what it means to
  • 00:25:19
    be a human being
  • 00:25:21
    i think this is a pretty fishy way of
  • 00:25:23
    doing this
  • 00:25:24
    i think the idea of trying to find out
  • 00:25:26
    what it's like to be a human being
  • 00:25:27
    inwardly is an interesting thought the
  • 00:25:30
    difficulty is is that in practice it's
  • 00:25:31
    awfully hard to talk about these things
  • 00:25:34
    now here's the first difficulty truth
  • 00:25:36
    conditions
  • 00:25:38
    how do we know which of these predicates
  • 00:25:40
    are the essential ones
  • 00:25:42
    help me out here i can imagine some
  • 00:25:45
    which it seems fairly clear
  • 00:25:46
    uh triangles have to have the property
  • 00:25:48
    of having three sides i can believe that
  • 00:25:50
    i mean that's not too controversial but
  • 00:25:52
    i can imagine cases where it wouldn't be
  • 00:25:54
    clear even among phenomenologists
  • 00:25:57
    and there were there might be a lack of
  • 00:25:58
    agreement and i'm not quite sure how we
  • 00:26:00
    go about finding that out
  • 00:26:01
    and even if and if i just look at it
  • 00:26:03
    from my own perspective you know leave
  • 00:26:04
    out the
  • 00:26:05
    the social interaction between
  • 00:26:06
    phenomenologists i look at it in my case
  • 00:26:08
    and i say all right so i've decided that
  • 00:26:10
    one of the essential predicates of human
  • 00:26:12
    being
  • 00:26:12
    is the fact that it is self-conscious
  • 00:26:14
    that's just fine now suppose i'm
  • 00:26:15
    uncertain about that
  • 00:26:16
    well i guess i can't be uncertain about
  • 00:26:18
    it because i found out by introspection
  • 00:26:20
    and i'm certain of all the things that i
  • 00:26:21
    introspect
  • 00:26:22
    so i guess i can't be uncertain about
  • 00:26:24
    that but suppose i talk to one of my
  • 00:26:25
    students and i say
  • 00:26:26
    kid one of the essential properties of
  • 00:26:28
    the human mind is that it's
  • 00:26:29
    self-conscious
  • 00:26:30
    suppose he says professor how do you
  • 00:26:32
    know
  • 00:26:34
    and what is it to pound the table and
  • 00:26:35
    say look don't ask me how i know
  • 00:26:37
    i looked inside myself and i know that's
  • 00:26:39
    not a very satisfactory answer and you
  • 00:26:41
    get the sense that
  • 00:26:42
    there's no real way to gesture at this
  • 00:26:44
    the difficulty that we're going
  • 00:26:45
    to find is something like this i can say
  • 00:26:46
    look i'll do it right now i intuited
  • 00:26:48
    this yesterday
  • 00:26:49
    i looked inside myself and i found out
  • 00:26:50
    that one of the essential properties of
  • 00:26:52
    a human being is
  • 00:26:53
    that it should be self-conscious and if
  • 00:26:55
    you don't believe me i'm going to do it
  • 00:26:56
    now i'm going to sit here and
  • 00:26:57
    introspect and yeah i'm definitely right
  • 00:26:59
    i've done the phenomenological reduction
  • 00:27:00
    i've bracketed the world and take my
  • 00:27:02
    word for it
  • 00:27:02
    this is really the case now we would
  • 00:27:04
    like this to be a universal logical
  • 00:27:06
    procedure we would like this to be
  • 00:27:07
    univocal
  • 00:27:08
    my sense is that in practice it is not
  • 00:27:10
    problem number one
  • 00:27:11
    uh what it reminds me one of the things
  • 00:27:13
    that sort of ruins husserl for a man
  • 00:27:15
    is if you have been exposed to ludwig
  • 00:27:17
    wittgenstein before you do husserl
  • 00:27:20
    because wittgenstein's work is a
  • 00:27:22
    wonderful way of dissolving these kind
  • 00:27:24
    of problems in other words the king
  • 00:27:25
    says he doesn't want to talk about
  • 00:27:26
    whether this is true or false look the
  • 00:27:28
    whole problem is misconceived
  • 00:27:30
    and that's the real difficulty we have
  • 00:27:31
    here and let's think about that what the
  • 00:27:33
    criticism of this is going to be
  • 00:27:34
    what cyril thinks he's doing when he
  • 00:27:36
    finds out what the essence of a human
  • 00:27:37
    being is
  • 00:27:38
    he thinks he's finding out something
  • 00:27:39
    about the universal structure of the
  • 00:27:40
    human mind
  • 00:27:41
    and that all people have to think that
  • 00:27:43
    because these words these terms like
  • 00:27:45
    human being
  • 00:27:45
    correspond to natural kinds in the world
  • 00:27:48
    and the natural kinds of the world
  • 00:27:49
    correspond to natural
  • 00:27:50
    categories in the in human cognition my
  • 00:27:53
    point is that's probably not true
  • 00:27:56
    wittgenstein would help will help us out
  • 00:27:58
    here wittgenstein says
  • 00:27:59
    i want to leave i want to lead the fly
  • 00:28:01
    out of the fly bottle
  • 00:28:03
    husserl is a guy walking around or like
  • 00:28:06
    a fly walking around inside the fly
  • 00:28:07
    bottle
  • 00:28:08
    unable to get out here's the problem
  • 00:28:10
    instead of
  • 00:28:11
    essences being a quality intrinsic to
  • 00:28:13
    the human mind wittgenstein will point
  • 00:28:15
    out that essences are equality intrinsic
  • 00:28:16
    to a particular language
  • 00:28:18
    so that's when you find out that uh
  • 00:28:20
    self-consciousness is a necessary
  • 00:28:21
    predicate for essence
  • 00:28:22
    you're not finding out the the some
  • 00:28:25
    quality about the human mind
  • 00:28:26
    intrinsically
  • 00:28:27
    which corresponds to essence what you're
  • 00:28:29
    finding out is about the way we
  • 00:28:30
    we use the word essence in the english
  • 00:28:32
    language all right
  • 00:28:33
    so wittgenstein by dissolving this could
  • 00:28:35
    have saved i mean if you've just been
  • 00:28:36
    born if they want a generation apart you
  • 00:28:38
    know there's if they can try to come a
  • 00:28:39
    generation before
  • 00:28:40
    instead of hostile coming a generation
  • 00:28:42
    before he could have saved the guy an
  • 00:28:43
    awful lot of handwriting
  • 00:28:45
    like he said look the whole idea is
  • 00:28:46
    wrong there's no such thing as an
  • 00:28:48
    essence and what you're trying to do
  • 00:28:50
    what you're doing is reifying language
  • 00:28:51
    and treating it as a model of the psyche
  • 00:28:53
    and that's just wrong
  • 00:28:55
    right there was a wonderful i mean think
  • 00:28:56
    about my
  • 00:28:58
    hypothetical situation with my student
  • 00:29:00
    where i said look i intuited this
  • 00:29:01
    yesterday i did the phenomenological
  • 00:29:02
    reduction i'm going to do it now and
  • 00:29:04
    believe me this will confirm what i said
  • 00:29:05
    yesterday that that
  • 00:29:07
    the essence of huma of consciousness of
  • 00:29:09
    human being is consciousness
  • 00:29:11
    this is a lot like what victinshine said
  • 00:29:13
    when he said look suppose you bought a
  • 00:29:14
    newspaper and you had some doubt
  • 00:29:15
    as to what the story meant or of the
  • 00:29:17
    truth of a given story on page one
  • 00:29:19
    how would you find out if the story was
  • 00:29:21
    true well there are different ways you
  • 00:29:22
    might do that but one way that you
  • 00:29:23
    wouldn't do that
  • 00:29:24
    is to go out and buy another copy of the
  • 00:29:26
    same paper
  • 00:29:27
    right now you see the point so when i
  • 00:29:29
    when i say look i'm going to intuit this
  • 00:29:30
    again for you what i'm doing is i'm
  • 00:29:32
    buying another copy of the same paper
  • 00:29:33
    this doesn't tell us anything
  • 00:29:34
    and this can't tell us anything i can
  • 00:29:36
    buy an infinite number of copies of the
  • 00:29:37
    same paper it's still not going to tell
  • 00:29:38
    us anything
  • 00:29:39
    see the difficulty here he's trapped
  • 00:29:41
    within the intracosm and he can't figure
  • 00:29:43
    out how to get out
  • 00:29:44
    and neither can i if i follow this
  • 00:29:46
    procedure now can you see why this is
  • 00:29:47
    going to be an extremely nebulous kind
  • 00:29:49
    of philosophy or it's going to be very
  • 00:29:50
    hard to talk
  • 00:29:52
    about how we move from my internal
  • 00:29:55
    consciousness to certain facts of the
  • 00:29:56
    psyche to yours
  • 00:29:58
    the difficulty here is that when we turn
  • 00:30:00
    inward and when we get an
  • 00:30:02
    unmediated a symbolically unmediated
  • 00:30:04
    knowledge of anything
  • 00:30:05
    internal to my psyche the lack of
  • 00:30:08
    those symbols that lack of mediation
  • 00:30:10
    between me and these objects
  • 00:30:12
    right means that it's real hard for me
  • 00:30:13
    to talk about them later on
  • 00:30:16
    right and that means that it comes very
  • 00:30:18
    close to talking to yourself
  • 00:30:21
    right and that is the opposite of what
  • 00:30:23
    philosophy ought to be right
  • 00:30:24
    in a way that's a betrayal of the
  • 00:30:26
    platonic and aristotelian tradition
  • 00:30:28
    the idea of logos demands that knowledge
  • 00:30:29
    not just be rational but that it be
  • 00:30:31
    communicable that's one of the canons of
  • 00:30:33
    rationality and husserl
  • 00:30:34
    comes up to the barriers of language
  • 00:30:37
    which
  • 00:30:38
    what wittenstein calls the limits of
  • 00:30:39
    what can be said
  • 00:30:41
    and he'd like to step over but he never
  • 00:30:42
    quite manages to do it
  • 00:30:44
    right so that's the kind of problem that
  • 00:30:46
    comes up again and again and again
  • 00:30:48
    now towards the end of his life um
  • 00:30:52
    he developed uh the idea of the
  • 00:30:54
    lebensville
  • 00:30:55
    the life world and this turn
  • 00:30:58
    is toward the imminence of human
  • 00:31:00
    experience and human consciousness
  • 00:31:02
    let me see if i can explain this idea
  • 00:31:05
    what he wants to do is to look at the
  • 00:31:07
    world as it
  • 00:31:08
    appears to human beings as it is given
  • 00:31:10
    in human experience
  • 00:31:12
    as opposed to the impersonal abstract
  • 00:31:15
    experience of the world that we get from
  • 00:31:16
    our study of modern natural
  • 00:31:18
    science right in other words science
  • 00:31:20
    tells us for example the time goes on
  • 00:31:22
    indefinitely
  • 00:31:23
    human beings don't experience time like
  • 00:31:25
    that they have a very limited span in
  • 00:31:26
    the world
  • 00:31:27
    right that's one of the big differences
  • 00:31:28
    concrete time is human time my life
  • 00:31:31
    abstract time is just t sub one t sub
  • 00:31:33
    two t sub n goes on forever
  • 00:31:35
    in other words science abstracts and to
  • 00:31:37
    that extent somewhat falsifies
  • 00:31:39
    the reality of human experience right um
  • 00:31:41
    he spends a lot of time discussing
  • 00:31:43
    his views on time and his views on
  • 00:31:46
    internal time consciousness
  • 00:31:47
    that's the kind of thing that
  • 00:31:49
    phenomenology would be suited to if we
  • 00:31:51
    could ever get something done out of it
  • 00:31:52
    the difficulty is this cyril spends a
  • 00:31:54
    lot of his time most of his career
  • 00:31:56
    not actually doing phenomenology i mean
  • 00:31:58
    applying this method but rather
  • 00:32:00
    figuring out what this method is right
  • 00:32:03
    and refining it and
  • 00:32:04
    trying to explain how it is we're going
  • 00:32:06
    to do something later on as soon as we
  • 00:32:08
    figure out how to do it
  • 00:32:09
    right and some at some it appears i mean
  • 00:32:12
    from my reading of this which has been
  • 00:32:14
    most unsatisfactory
  • 00:32:16
    it has because i mean the the the
  • 00:32:18
    philosophy itself is in many respects
  • 00:32:19
    quite nebulous
  • 00:32:20
    um the best understanding i could come
  • 00:32:23
    away with is this
  • 00:32:24
    that at some point in the end in the
  • 00:32:25
    indefinite future we will find out
  • 00:32:27
    precisely what this method is and i mean
  • 00:32:28
    precisely mathematically cartesian
  • 00:32:30
    in that sense and then after we find out
  • 00:32:33
    precisely what the method is at some
  • 00:32:34
    point in the indefinite future
  • 00:32:35
    we will then actually be able to apply
  • 00:32:37
    it to something and get some results
  • 00:32:38
    at some indefinite point beyond that and
  • 00:32:40
    then after that
  • 00:32:42
    at some indefinite point after we've
  • 00:32:43
    gotten all these essences and assembled
  • 00:32:44
    them all in a lovely array
  • 00:32:46
    then we'll have some idea of what
  • 00:32:47
    exactly we can do with this
  • 00:32:49
    i mean i'm told initially that the whole
  • 00:32:51
    point of it is to give us an indubitable
  • 00:32:52
    foundation to knowledge
  • 00:32:54
    i would hope so but it seems like we
  • 00:32:55
    have to act on faith to a great extent
  • 00:32:58
    because
  • 00:32:58
    it's very hard for him to communicate
  • 00:33:00
    with uh to us directly
  • 00:33:01
    what it is that we're supposed to do
  • 00:33:02
    with this and how it is we're supposed
  • 00:33:04
    to do it
  • 00:33:04
    the best phenomenologists dispute
  • 00:33:07
    questions like this
  • 00:33:09
    a further problem that we're going to
  • 00:33:10
    get out of this neo-cartesian kind of a
  • 00:33:12
    project is the question of other minds
  • 00:33:15
    descartes always had a problem i mean he
  • 00:33:17
    didn't have any problem explaining how
  • 00:33:18
    he knew he existed and what his
  • 00:33:19
    existence was like
  • 00:33:21
    but he always ran up against a sort of
  • 00:33:22
    glass barrier when he tried to explain
  • 00:33:24
    what grounds we have for believing in
  • 00:33:26
    the reality of other people's psyche
  • 00:33:27
    why is this not a kind of wilderness of
  • 00:33:29
    objects and
  • 00:33:31
    he thinks that there are other minds but
  • 00:33:32
    he can't quite explain why or how and
  • 00:33:34
    hosuro is doing something very much like
  • 00:33:36
    that
  • 00:33:36
    he says among among other things that we
  • 00:33:38
    find out about
  • 00:33:39
    human minds through something that is
  • 00:33:42
    phenomenologically present to us
  • 00:33:44
    empathy alas he doesn't have a
  • 00:33:46
    satisfactory phenomenological analysis
  • 00:33:48
    of empathy he kind of pounds the desk
  • 00:33:50
    and insists that yes there are other
  • 00:33:52
    minds yes we can know them and yes we do
  • 00:33:53
    so through empathy and to be honest
  • 00:33:55
    i think that that's kind of in a
  • 00:33:57
    pre-philosophic kind of common sense way
  • 00:33:58
    that's true
  • 00:33:59
    i mean how else are you going to find
  • 00:34:00
    out about other minds i don't know why
  • 00:34:02
    we need a philosophy to tell us this
  • 00:34:04
    right i don't know why we need this
  • 00:34:06
    elaborate uh procedure
  • 00:34:08
    in order to be able to affirm that right
  • 00:34:10
    i don't think that he really made any
  • 00:34:11
    progress along those lines
  • 00:34:14
    here's the issue all right let's just
  • 00:34:15
    drop back a little bit think about
  • 00:34:17
    what the difficulty we have here is he
  • 00:34:19
    wants to turn inward
  • 00:34:21
    and he also wants to talk and the
  • 00:34:24
    advantage of the anglo-american
  • 00:34:25
    tradition is that by concentrating on
  • 00:34:27
    external stuff
  • 00:34:28
    on the public world it's relatively easy
  • 00:34:30
    to say what you're talking about
  • 00:34:32
    to refer directly to things in the world
  • 00:34:34
    because they're public they're external
  • 00:34:35
    they're here
  • 00:34:36
    when i turn inward it's very hard to
  • 00:34:38
    make these questions public
  • 00:34:40
    and here's the difficulty the temptation
  • 00:34:42
    that the anglo-american tradition has is
  • 00:34:44
    to just abolish the internal world
  • 00:34:46
    remember i mean think of the uh of the
  • 00:34:48
    idea that we get with locke and hume
  • 00:34:49
    that the psyche is a kind of an empty
  • 00:34:51
    box a tabula rasa
  • 00:34:53
    and all these impressions get sent in
  • 00:34:54
    and then we associate them you get that
  • 00:34:56
    association of psychology
  • 00:34:57
    and that's what the mind is it's a
  • 00:34:58
    bundle of sensations that is an
  • 00:35:01
    impoverished view of human experience
  • 00:35:03
    i mean if you stop and think about it
  • 00:35:04
    nobody nobody views the world and
  • 00:35:05
    experiences the world as a bundle of
  • 00:35:07
    sensations
  • 00:35:08
    here's the difficulty if we follow the
  • 00:35:09
    anglo-american tradition
  • 00:35:11
    and we insist on the accuracy and
  • 00:35:13
    precision of our speech
  • 00:35:15
    all we're able to talk about is the
  • 00:35:17
    external world
  • 00:35:18
    their statements about what goes on
  • 00:35:20
    inside in other words the anglo-american
  • 00:35:22
    empiricists can't make the jump from the
  • 00:35:23
    outside
  • 00:35:23
    in and that's why the theory of the
  • 00:35:26
    internal world is so impoverished
  • 00:35:27
    and it doesn't really persuade anybody
  • 00:35:30
    right
  • 00:35:31
    it's in other words the anglo-american
  • 00:35:32
    tradition is a theory of the things that
  • 00:35:34
    are easy to talk about
  • 00:35:37
    right the difficulty is is that there
  • 00:35:39
    are more things
  • 00:35:40
    on heaven and earth than are dreamt of
  • 00:35:42
    in your philosophy i have an internal
  • 00:35:44
    life i experience the world that way
  • 00:35:46
    and although these things are difficult
  • 00:35:47
    to talk about i feel the need
  • 00:35:49
    to say something about them even if it
  • 00:35:51
    is unclear and nebulous
  • 00:35:53
    can you see then what the continental
  • 00:35:55
    response to that is
  • 00:35:56
    um what they're going to do is sacrifice
  • 00:36:00
    precision
  • 00:36:02
    in order to enlarge the domain of
  • 00:36:03
    discourse
  • 00:36:05
    it is possible to truncate the domain of
  • 00:36:06
    discourse as the anglo-american
  • 00:36:08
    tradition does
  • 00:36:09
    and you get an increased resolution in
  • 00:36:12
    in the precision of your speech
  • 00:36:14
    but this resolution is costs a very high
  • 00:36:16
    price you lose
  • 00:36:17
    all of internal reality right you lose
  • 00:36:20
    the internal world they deny there is an
  • 00:36:21
    internal world
  • 00:36:22
    what that sort of procedure will lead to
  • 00:36:23
    is something like behavioral psychology
  • 00:36:25
    pavlov and watson and skinner where
  • 00:36:27
    there is no mind to talk about
  • 00:36:29
    now here's the difficulty if you follow
  • 00:36:32
    that sort of scientistic anglo-american
  • 00:36:34
    path what you're going to get is a very
  • 00:36:36
    elegant and precise
  • 00:36:39
    set of verbal canons which account
  • 00:36:42
    for the world around us but don't do a
  • 00:36:44
    very good job of telling you about
  • 00:36:46
    yourself
  • 00:36:47
    and what husserl and the cartesians of
  • 00:36:48
    various stripes will say is that you
  • 00:36:50
    don't know yourself how you gonna know
  • 00:36:51
    the world
  • 00:36:52
    right what the oracle delphi says know
  • 00:36:55
    thyself
  • 00:36:56
    it's a precondition for knowledge on the
  • 00:36:58
    other hand
  • 00:36:59
    if you want to stay on the inside the
  • 00:37:01
    difficulty is is that
  • 00:37:03
    we are unable to get even the most basic
  • 00:37:05
    or
  • 00:37:06
    foundational gestures at this content
  • 00:37:10
    across to other people i know very well
  • 00:37:13
    about my
  • 00:37:13
    internal mental states it's a i have a
  • 00:37:15
    hard time getting them across to you
  • 00:37:16
    much of ludwig wittgenstein's work was
  • 00:37:18
    an attempt to bridge this gap
  • 00:37:20
    but it's very very difficult and at
  • 00:37:21
    least mysterious and
  • 00:37:23
    startling formations what husserl did
  • 00:37:27
    in kind of pounding on the desk in the
  • 00:37:29
    in a kind of cartesian way
  • 00:37:31
    is to construct the idea of
  • 00:37:32
    intersubjectivity
  • 00:37:34
    in other words the way in which these
  • 00:37:36
    phenomenological psyches these
  • 00:37:37
    transcendental egos communicate with
  • 00:37:39
    each other
  • 00:37:40
    is or or the matrix in which they
  • 00:37:42
    communicate with each other
  • 00:37:43
    is his idea of inter-subjectivity an
  • 00:37:46
    idea which is never completely or
  • 00:37:47
    clearly defined
  • 00:37:48
    it allows us to form a sort of
  • 00:37:50
    linguistic or verbal community with
  • 00:37:52
    other minds
  • 00:37:53
    and i mean i kind of naively believe
  • 00:37:55
    that there is such a thing but he isn't
  • 00:37:56
    able to give any very satisfactory
  • 00:37:58
    account of it
  • 00:37:58
    and the reason why is the structure i
  • 00:38:00
    was generally i was gesturing at just a
  • 00:38:02
    little while ago
  • 00:38:03
    all these continental guys if you look
  • 00:38:05
    at yourself it's hard to break out of
  • 00:38:07
    this solid cystic circle if you start on
  • 00:38:09
    the outside the problem is you can't get
  • 00:38:10
    into your own mind
  • 00:38:11
    and you started out as a mind there are
  • 00:38:12
    problems with both sides
  • 00:38:14
    what i'm trying to do here is something
  • 00:38:16
    like this not to vindicate or justify
  • 00:38:19
    husserl
  • 00:38:19
    because i think that probably isn't
  • 00:38:20
    going to work all right in many respects
  • 00:38:22
    you may want to think that of husserl as
  • 00:38:24
    being
  • 00:38:24
    german romanticism cartesianized the
  • 00:38:27
    lonely german the lonely
  • 00:38:29
    ego of schiller or goethe right given a
  • 00:38:32
    sort of mathematical cartesian
  • 00:38:33
    formulation
  • 00:38:34
    right and he insists in a kind of
  • 00:38:36
    romantic way
  • 00:38:38
    that i am a self i know i am conscious
  • 00:38:40
    and look i can't doubt that it's just
  • 00:38:41
    that's the fact of the matter i'm gonna
  • 00:38:43
    on this rock i will build my church all
  • 00:38:45
    right well
  • 00:38:47
    i can see how you might have a certain
  • 00:38:49
    desire to do that
  • 00:38:51
    my problem is that we're always going to
  • 00:38:53
    end up either talking to ourselves or
  • 00:38:55
    constructing arbitrary commonsensical
  • 00:38:57
    bridges
  • 00:38:58
    from our philosophical solidism into the
  • 00:38:59
    regular world of everyday praxis
  • 00:39:02
    all right and that's built into the idea
  • 00:39:04
    of this project that all the continental
  • 00:39:06
    thinkers are involved with
  • 00:39:08
    so what i'm asking for in some respects
  • 00:39:10
    is that you cut the continental
  • 00:39:11
    philosophers a little bit of slack
  • 00:39:14
    because of the fact that the project
  • 00:39:15
    they have undertaken is probably
  • 00:39:17
    impossible
  • 00:39:18
    i mean it may well be just impossible to
  • 00:39:20
    talk about the internal facts of my
  • 00:39:22
    psychic states or it is so with a great
  • 00:39:25
    deal of difficulty and a great deal of
  • 00:39:27
    cloudiness it is not
  • 00:39:28
    any particular problem with hussurl or
  • 00:39:30
    this or any specific philosopher
  • 00:39:31
    it is built into that kind of project of
  • 00:39:33
    making a bridging this gap between
  • 00:39:35
    what's inside and what's outside
  • 00:39:36
    but here's the down here's the
  • 00:39:38
    alternative we can go to the
  • 00:39:39
    anglo-american tradition i mean
  • 00:39:40
    professor stalloff and i have this
  • 00:39:41
    argument essentially all the time
  • 00:39:44
    right because i mean neither one is
  • 00:39:46
    completely satisfactory
  • 00:39:47
    well if you start out with the external
  • 00:39:49
    world you're never going to get a sense
  • 00:39:50
    of yourself
  • 00:39:51
    you're never going to talk about these
  • 00:39:52
    internal facts and that means
  • 00:39:54
    that you will have to impoverish the
  • 00:39:57
    vocabulary
  • 00:39:58
    of our experience in other words the
  • 00:39:59
    problem with with um with hume or with
  • 00:40:01
    any of these anglo-american peers i just
  • 00:40:03
    don't experience the world like that
  • 00:40:04
    and i think that's a very fair objection
  • 00:40:07
    let me give you an example i'd have to
  • 00:40:09
    make an analogy here and this would may
  • 00:40:11
    perhaps make this whole difference
  • 00:40:13
    between the anglo-americans and the
  • 00:40:15
    continentals
  • 00:40:16
    more apparent let's try the idea of
  • 00:40:18
    going to a tailor and getting a suit of
  • 00:40:19
    clothes
  • 00:40:20
    okay it's a simple everyday thing go to
  • 00:40:22
    a tailor
  • 00:40:23
    and he measures you and you come back
  • 00:40:25
    next week and you've got your suit of
  • 00:40:26
    clothes
  • 00:40:27
    and you put on the jacket and you find
  • 00:40:28
    the jacket only has one arm
  • 00:40:30
    the tailor says well if your jacket only
  • 00:40:33
    has one arm your body is wrong
  • 00:40:36
    and the customer might well say well no
  • 00:40:38
    hold up let me get this straight now
  • 00:40:40
    my body is wrong and your suit is right
  • 00:40:42
    no that's not that's insane i mean
  • 00:40:44
    that's not the idea here in other words
  • 00:40:46
    my body starts out being right i'm sure
  • 00:40:48
    that this is how i'm shaped
  • 00:40:49
    and that if you only have one sleeve in
  • 00:40:51
    your jacket change the jacket the jacket
  • 00:40:53
    is wrong not my body
  • 00:40:54
    and if the tailor says no that's so you
  • 00:40:56
    know that's absurd of you you really
  • 00:40:57
    have to remove that arm
  • 00:40:59
    that's crazy i'm not removing my arm
  • 00:41:00
    you're definitely putting in another arm
  • 00:41:02
    to this jacket
  • 00:41:03
    in other words do we change our body to
  • 00:41:05
    suit our jacket or we change our jacket
  • 00:41:06
    to suit our body
  • 00:41:08
    now let me suggest that our body is the
  • 00:41:09
    set of our experiences
  • 00:41:11
    and that the jacket is the philosophical
  • 00:41:13
    theory with which we account for them
  • 00:41:15
    you really want to cut off your
  • 00:41:16
    experience of cause and effect of good
  • 00:41:18
    and evil
  • 00:41:19
    of lust and rage and hatred and beauty
  • 00:41:21
    um because you can't talk about them
  • 00:41:22
    precisely
  • 00:41:24
    or is this demand for philosophical
  • 00:41:26
    precision
  • 00:41:27
    taken to an unreasonable extreme in
  • 00:41:30
    other words
  • 00:41:30
    when uh when aj air force is it air that
  • 00:41:33
    has the view that
  • 00:41:34
    say more moral theory is non-cognitive
  • 00:41:37
    right
  • 00:41:38
    well i experience morals at least
  • 00:41:39
    sometimes as being real and right and
  • 00:41:41
    wrong
  • 00:41:42
    if these anglo-american guys these real
  • 00:41:44
    hard shell and piercers tell me that my
  • 00:41:45
    experience is wrong
  • 00:41:46
    it's like the tailor telling me my
  • 00:41:47
    body's wrong don't tell me that i'm
  • 00:41:49
    experiencing the world wrong no
  • 00:41:50
    your theory is wrong and if it doesn't
  • 00:41:52
    correspond to my experience then
  • 00:41:54
    fix the theory don't tell me to fix my
  • 00:41:55
    experience my experience comes first
  • 00:41:58
    now can you see the strength of with
  • 00:41:59
    sorel's point right this is a
  • 00:42:02
    devastating
  • 00:42:03
    sort of an argument and in my respect
  • 00:42:04
    it's in my view it's actually true
  • 00:42:06
    you know i think that husserl's attempt
  • 00:42:08
    to find a way out of this labyrinth just
  • 00:42:10
    doesn't work
  • 00:42:10
    right he's spinning his wheels he's
  • 00:42:12
    caught in a snow drift but
  • 00:42:14
    the idea of telling to these scientific
  • 00:42:16
    empirical rational logical guys
  • 00:42:18
    that if your theory doesn't correspond
  • 00:42:20
    to my experience
  • 00:42:21
    your theory is wrong not my experience i
  • 00:42:23
    think that's right on the money
  • 00:42:24
    and i think that's the strong point of
  • 00:42:26
    all continental philosophies they say
  • 00:42:28
    i'm going to look at myself and the way
  • 00:42:29
    i experience the world first and if your
  • 00:42:31
    theory
  • 00:42:31
    corresponds to that and accounts for
  • 00:42:33
    that so so be it if it doesn't
  • 00:42:35
    i am not going to say well look i'll
  • 00:42:36
    stop giving i'll give up on beauty i'll
  • 00:42:37
    give up on morality
  • 00:42:39
    i'll give up on all my psychic states
  • 00:42:41
    all my emotions because after all
  • 00:42:42
    either i talk about them clearly or i
  • 00:42:44
    don't talk about them at all no
  • 00:42:46
    this demand for clarity has been taken
  • 00:42:47
    to an unreasonable extreme
  • 00:42:49
    it would be much better for us if we
  • 00:42:51
    were to start with experience or
  • 00:42:53
    uh as visceral's uh slogan was to the
  • 00:42:55
    things themselves
  • 00:42:57
    well modify that a bit let's start with
  • 00:43:00
    experience
  • 00:43:01
    let's make our slogan experience first
  • 00:43:03
    me first
  • 00:43:04
    and then i'll construct my world around
  • 00:43:06
    that i'm not going to instruct myself
  • 00:43:07
    around the world that's insane
  • 00:43:09
    it's like it's like changing my body to
  • 00:43:10
    suit my suit that's crazy
  • 00:43:12
    this is the strong point of visceral and
  • 00:43:14
    if it doesn't ultimately
  • 00:43:16
    offer us intuition of the essence of
  • 00:43:18
    being whatever it is that he's trying to
  • 00:43:20
    do here
  • 00:43:21
    if it doesn't offer us the ultimate
  • 00:43:23
    structure
  • 00:43:24
    of human cognition it does make an
  • 00:43:27
    important point
  • 00:43:28
    against the problem of western against
  • 00:43:30
    the problem that western philosophy has
  • 00:43:32
    drifted into
  • 00:43:33
    it makes the point that i come first
  • 00:43:36
    and that's what phenomenology is you
  • 00:43:38
    know if you leave out all the verbiage
  • 00:43:39
    and the elaborate intellectual apparatus
  • 00:43:41
    that he constructs
  • 00:43:42
    it all proceeds from the basic intuition
  • 00:43:44
    that i my experience is right
  • 00:43:46
    and any theory that tells me my
  • 00:43:47
    experience is mistaken is
  • 00:43:49
    fundamentally has a cart before the
  • 00:43:52
    horse
  • 00:43:53
    right and i think that's what holds
  • 00:43:55
    together the whole
  • 00:43:58
    tradition of continental philosophy in
  • 00:43:59
    the 20th century this will be true for
  • 00:44:01
    husserl but it's also gonna be true for
  • 00:44:03
    heidegger
  • 00:44:03
    it's gonna be true for bergson it's
  • 00:44:05
    gonna be true for all these guys that
  • 00:44:06
    start out
  • 00:44:07
    looking at themselves right and
  • 00:44:10
    if they get nebulous and fuzzy well
  • 00:44:12
    that's just built into the problem
  • 00:44:13
    think of another way another analogy
  • 00:44:15
    that we can bring to this is that
  • 00:44:17
    it's like singing the precision of
  • 00:44:19
    addiction
  • 00:44:21
    costs something the precision of our
  • 00:44:23
    thinking and speech costs something
  • 00:44:25
    we can loosen up the diction so it's not
  • 00:44:27
    so precise what we're saying but we can
  • 00:44:28
    gain in range
  • 00:44:29
    we can hit the high notes intellectually
  • 00:44:30
    and i think that talking about right and
  • 00:44:32
    wrong and talking about beauty and
  • 00:44:33
    talking about the really important
  • 00:44:34
    things
  • 00:44:34
    psychically those are the high notes of
  • 00:44:36
    philosophy and the problem is that the
  • 00:44:38
    appearances can't hit those notes
  • 00:44:40
    they have better diction than i do but
  • 00:44:42
    you can hit the high notes like this and
  • 00:44:43
    this is what it's for
  • 00:44:45
    and so for all the nebulous and dubious
  • 00:44:47
    and perhaps even mystical qualities that
  • 00:44:49
    we find in husserl
  • 00:44:50
    this is a serious and worthwhile attempt
  • 00:44:52
    to account for what it means to be
  • 00:44:54
    an ego in the 20th century
Tag
  • Edmund Husserl
  • phenomenology
  • 20th-century philosophy
  • consciousness
  • Cartesian philosophy
  • science of sciences
  • intellectual project
  • continental philosophy