California Phenomenology

Constitution Through Noema and Horizon: Husserl’s Theory of Intentionality

“…The ways things are given in consciousness we call noemata, forms of experience carrying the meaning that structures our consciousness of things in the world. The present aim is to lay out fundamentals and motivations of the California approach to phenomenology-a particular research program in the field of phenomenology (Yoshimi et al, 2019).…”

The Two Cultures in Philosophy

“…2 He compares the inability of intellectuals on either side to talk or even understand one another to tone-deafness, and suggests that in this particular case the impairment was brought about by lack of training. 3 Restating his position four years after the original lecture, he writes: "Persons educated with the greatest intensity we know can no longer communicate with each other on the plain of their major intellectual concern." 4 Instead of communication and "fellow feeling," he adds, there is "something like hostility."…”

“…Derrida in his summary of the debate suggests that Searle has the traditions the wrong way round, and that it is Derrida who is closer to Austin, while Searle, by ignoring the "continental" tradition, remains "blindly imprisoned in it, repeating its most problematic gestures," like the uncritical assumption of Husserl's account of intentionality. 3 In the end the debate amounted to little more than Searle condemning Derrida's "obscurantism" and Derrida mocking Searle's "superficiality." The obvious mutual hostility notwithstanding, it is important to notice that firstly, although reminiscent of the claims made only three decades earlier in similar confrontations, neither philosopher goes as far as to deem the other's position nonsensical; and secondly that the whole argument revolves around the relation, and the rules of engagement between the traditions, which are tacitly assumed to represent, all things being equal, valid philosophical outlooks.…”

“…3) Derrida, "Afterword: Toward an Ethic of Discussion," 130-31. the biggest names in both traditions in North America, to engage cooperatively on a clearly defined topic: Arthur Danto, Albert Hofstader, Alasdair MacIntyre, Richard Rorty, Wilfrid Sellars, Charles Taylor, and of course Dreyfus and Searle among others. 3 But in Drefus's own words, in his dialogue with Searle, "what looked like an illuminating disagreement about the phenomena turned into a debate about the value of phenomenology" in which both sides reproduced, rather than transcended the antagonism between the two traditions. 39 The debate unfolds in a series of polemical articles with telling titles beginning with Dreyfus's "Heidegger's Critique of the Husserl/Searle Account of Intentionality," 40 to which Searle replied with "The Limits of Phenomenology."…”

“…Snow is clear that the ultimate goal is one none of us can manage. 3 However, the very attempt can make all the difference when it comes to understanding one another, and being able to communicate ideas as part of one intellectual enterprise. As much as I believe Snow was correct to think this is needed in the wider culture, the same is just as urgently true of philosophy.…”