Phenomenology and Philosophy - Essay Example

Husserl's phenomenology is difficult to grasp at first due to the fact that his argument appears to contradict the way in which we have been conditioned to think since childhood. The entire concept of ideas and things being known by the senses, while believable, is basically at odds with the way in which we have been programmed to think as people. To explain this, one should refer to the fact that throughout our educational careers, we have been discouraged to think independently or to formulate our own ideas and independent knowledge. Instead, we have been taught that we need first to learn, to acquire the knowledge that has been uncovered for us, and passed down to us by the earlier generations, not to mention that contained in the Holy Books and then, formulate our own ideas and opinions on the basis of that collective knowledge. We may use our senses to make up our minds and pass judgment on certain issues but not to arrive at knowledge as such. Accordingly, and as stated, it is quite safe to say that the primary difficulty that a student faces when reading through Husserl's Phenomenology is that it forwards a different process of knowledge acquisition and the formulation of ideas than we have been conditioned to operate by. Despite the fact that Husserl's philosophy is quite different from the way in which we have been normally trained to think, leading to difficulty in fully understanding him, once we open our minds to his argument and his thoughts and consider them carefully, we are hit by the dawning realization that not only is Husserl's phenomenology directly relevant to the contemporary world but, in a way expressed ideas and conceptualizations of knowledge that exist in most cultures and in many schools of philosophy. This is especially evident in his discussion on "transcendental idealism" (40) and "phenomenological reduction" (41). As defined by G. Boland in "Phenomenology and Philosophy," phenomenology refers to a "20th-century philosophical movement dedicated to describing the structures of experiences as they present themselves to consciousness, without recourse to theory, deduction, or assumption from other disciplines such as the natural sciences." In other words, phenomenology is a school of philosophy which states that knowledge may be, and is, obtained from the senses and by experiences, and not only by the methods of science. Although such a statement on cognitive knowledge appears so obviously true that it requires no philosophical theories to argue on its behalf, the fact is that the growing reliance on scientific knowledge as compared to the decreasing dependence on, and trust in, the types of knowledge sources argued by this philosophy determine its importance and necessity. Not only that, but phenomenology, like other schools of philosophy, does not only state theories as such but precisely defines the intent of those theories and the scope which they cover. It is within the context of attempting to define precisely what phenomenology embraces and determine the types of knowledge that it can be cognitively produced, that Husserl undertook his philosophical inquiry and theorization. Husserl, a German philosopher, is considered one of the founders of the phenomenology school of philosophy and, in fact was the first to use the term, "phenomenology" (Bogland). As stated by Bogland, the main aim of Husserl's philosophical writings and studies was to the examination of "the structures of consciousness that enable consciousness to refer to objects outside itself." Doing so determined a complete focus on the human mind itself and the process of idea formation that occur within its limits. This process in which the mind itself, and nothing beyond it is studied, is referred to as "transcendental reduction" (Husserl, 12) and as "phenomenological reduction" (41). One of the interesting aspects of the human mind that Husserl called attention to is the fact that the mind is not only limited in thought and consideration to objects and things that actually do exist, but has the capacity to imagine and consider also that which does not exist. In other words, as Husserl points out, ideas are not necessarily born out of actual experiences or due to encounter with actual objects but may come out of nothing other than the power of the human imagination. If we consider this carefully, ewe realize that not only is this observation valid but it is definitely one that is well worth studying due to the fact that it is this human capacity that has function both as the source of progress and as the source of the arts and literature. In other words, if humans did not have the power to imagine, it is difficult to understand how we could have ever moved out from life in caves and tents to life in modern apartment buildings with modern facilities such as the means to control temperature according to our needs and preferences. To this degree, one begins to understand that Husserl's phenomenology is not stating the obvious but, is examining an importantquestion that has always been, and probably always will remain relevant to our lives. The nature of Husserl's philosophical thought, insofar as it outlines the power of the human mind and its inherent ability to arrive at fundamental truths and automatically process experience to arrive at knowledge has, according to Karl Ameriks, author of "Husserl's Realism," left him vulnerable to two alternate interpretations. On the one hand, some have claimed that he is an idealist, justifying their judgment through reference to the fact that he seemed to place a great deal of value on the power and worth of the human mind and its ability to arrive at knowledge and use the senses to arrive at ideas. Many philosophers, as Ameriks reports, have objected to this evaluation of Husserl as an idealist insofar as it has a negative connotation, so to say. That negative connotation arises from the fact that the "idealist" description of Husserl's philosophy implies that it is non-representative of the world or of human nature as they are, but rather look to them as they should be. This, reflects a tremendous misunderstanding of Husserl's work and ideas because, if properly read and understood, will lead to the conclusion that he is a realist. This is especially evident in Husserl's statement that "Have we not done transcendental realism an injustice The doctrine may lack a phenomenological foundation; but essentially it is right in the end, since it looks for a path from the immanency of the ego to the transcendency of the Other. Can we, as phenomenologists, do anything but agree with this " ( 42). The alternate interpretations of Husserl, whether a realist or an idealist, at once indicate the complexity of this man' philosophy, but more importantly, call upon us to determine which description is correct. Husserl's own writings lend to the confusion because they contain his opposition to philosophical realism and support for idealism on the one hand, and rejection of philosophical idealism and support for realism on the other. To illustrate this, it is necessary to note that at one point in his meditations, Husserl writes that "phenomenological philosophy and phenomenological idealism [are] the only possibilities" ( 42). Despite this quote appearing to be Husserl's own inarguable admission to being an idealist, however, this is not the case, whereby the totality of his works and the foundations for his ideas were realist and that Husserl himself conceded to that ( 42).. Consequently, what one notes here is a debate regarding the placement of Husserl into a specific category of though, not philosophical school. If we accept that Husserl is a realist, that does not necessarily negate his also being an idealist. While I do realize that this sounds a bit confused, I believe that I can clarify and justify this statement. Simply stated, the idealist has to be a realist insofar as he needs to have an accurate or truthful understanding of the world and of human nature, both positive and negative aspects of it, in order to arrive at a proposal for improvement, or the creation of more idealistic conditions as did, for instance, Sir Thomas Moore. Accordingly, if we try to apply both descriptions to Husserl we would note that he is a realist insofar as his examination and discussion of the manner in which humans processed information and used the senses to arrive at ideas and knowledge is scientific, if looked at from the view point of psychological theory. At the same time, we can say that he is idealistic in the sense that he did not really concede to the limitations of that knowledge or the fact that human beings may independently acquire ideas but it takes a collection of ideas from a number of people in order to establish knowledge. That is to say, ideas may be independently arrived at but knowledge requires a collective effort. As mentioned, humans, according to Husserl, had an inbuilt ability to comprehend matters and attain knowledge through sensation, or the use if the senses, and experientially. As may be inferred from the totality of the Cartesian Meditations, the aim of this philosophical school of inquiry is to transcend the limitations of the materialistic form of inquiry which is locked in the framework of science and absolutes, determined to stretch the horizons of knowledge. Phenomenologist, as Husserl attempted to do so by arguing in favor of the phenomenon of cognitive knowledge and by emphasizing the factor of "encounter." What is implied here is that human's encounter experiences and encounter matters that activated the senses, leading to the development of knowledge. The problem with this form of thought is that while practically all people, philosophers and scientists included, accept that certain types of emotional knowledge is acquired through this method, Husserl argued that even some types of absolute knowledge, like basic mathematics may be acquired in this way. Accordingly, one might say that the controversy here is not whether or not we can acquire knowledge through cognitive abilities but the types of knowledge that can be acquired through this means. As one tries to place Husserl's phenomenology into a modern context, we find that it is not only relevant but that it is extremely useful and necessary for one fundamental reason. In today's world with the great advances that have been made in the fields of science and technology, reaching the extent where we operate our lives and even live it through technology and the rule of science, our minds have become focused on absolute knowledge. That is, we are dominated by scientific knowledge and technology, at the expense of the more human forms of knowledge that one may acquire through cognition. Consequently, we may even say that technology, and the extent to which we are becoming dominated by it and its forms of knowledge are leading to the dehumanization of the human being. Consequently, from this perspective, one can see that Husserl's form of knowledge acquisition is very important in the modern world for two main reasons. The first reason is that it will expand our sources of knowledge which are increasingly becoming limited by the materialistic form of knowledge dominating our world. In the second place it is important for the creation of balance, not to mentioning the maintaining of individuality and humanization. Husserl's ideas and thoughts revolve around the fundamentally unchanging or stable operation of the human mind, and the never changing fact that this mind is constantly confronted with experiences which it needs to think over and issues that activate the senses and lead to the emergence of ideas. Furthermore, within the context of the modern world, I believe that we have a better understanding of the basic principles argued by Husserl insofar as they are relevant to, or an important part of the field of psychology. In other words, we do know, in the scientific sense, how experience and senses play an important part in the formation of knowledge, ideas and personality development. However, what I do believe is that the very structure and technology of the modern world has effectively enabled us to expand beyond the individual experience and senses to embrace that of others. Simply stated, through the television or films, we witness, and even feel the experiences of others as if they are our own and if we empathize enough with the characters can even sense as they do. The end result of this is that their experiences become our own to a degree and the knowledge that they arrive at from those experiences is added to our knowledge. In other words, and what I mean to say here, is that the very nature of modern technology has given us the experiences of others as if they were our own, increasing that knowledge which we arrive at experientially. Works Cited Ameriks, Karl. "Husserl's Realism." The Philosophical Review. 86, 4 (Oct., 1977). Bogland, D. G. "Phenomenology and Philosophy." 2001. Husserl, Edmund. Cartesian Meditations: An Introduction to Phenomenology. Cairns, Dorion, trans. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999. Read More