Dasein - Monoskop

118 PART III
linguistic community". 448 Concerning language Husserl writes that
language is ...
related correlatively to the world, the universe of objects which
is linguistically expressible in its being and its being-such. Thus
men as men, fellow men, world—the world of which men, of
which we, always talk and can talk—and, on the other hand,
language, are inseparably intertwined; and one is always certain
of their inseparable relational unity, though usually only
implicitly .. . 449
In other passages of the same study 450 Husserl makes clear that
civilization and cultural world as life-world are, if not identical, at
least "essentially corresponding" to each other. 451 This suggests that
for Husserl a specific life-world qua cultural world is correlated with
a specific language, in other words, that a life-world is the world of
a linguistic community.
However, Husserl's notion of life-world is not without its ambiguities.
As has been pointed out by several scholars 452 , the notion
of life-world is not only applied to the cultural world, but also to the
world of immediate—pre-linguistic—perceptual experience. In the
Crisis, for example, after having criticized Galilei and Kant for having
disregarded the life-world, and in turning to its explication 453 ,
Husserl more or less repeats his earlier analyses of the perception of
things and bodies; here the life-world does not seem to be treated
as specifically cultural. More ambiguity stems from the fact that
Husserl himself sometimes uses life-worlds in the plural 454 while stating
in other places that "the plural makes no sense when applied
to it". 455 Furthermore, Husserl calls the life-world a "world for us
all" 456 but also says that "each of us has his life-world, meant as the
world for all". 457 And finally, while in most places the life-world is
opposed to the world of science, in other places the life-world is said
to include science as a praxis. 458
These ambiguities somehow reflect the different elements in
Husserl's thought that lead to the systematic treatment of the lifeworld:
foremost the horizon analysis of perception, and the problems
of intersubjeetivity, objectivity, and science. It can perhaps also be
suggested that the different ambiguities mentioned above can be seen