06.10.2013 Views

Dasein - Monoskop

Dasein - Monoskop

Dasein - Monoskop

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

HUSSERL'S PHENOMENOLOGY AND LANGUAGE AS CALCULUS 17<br />

sentences with such a strong psychologistic flavour at all must be<br />

understood against the background of the threat of formalism. For<br />

Husserl it is the accessibility of meaning as the central ingredient<br />

of the calculus conception that has to be defended first and foremost,<br />

and hence it is the meaning-neglecting formalism that has to<br />

be avoided at all costs. For the same reason, it is crucial to demonstrate<br />

to the mathematicians that they cannot avoid questions about<br />

meaning and that they cannot solve the philosophical problems of<br />

their own science by stipulation. Furthermore, it seems that Husserl<br />

thought that formalism and a "formal" logical definition of number<br />

both end up on the same wrong meaning-denying side of the fence:<br />

Frege does not aim for a psychological analysis of the concept of<br />

number at all; he does not expect that such an analysis could<br />

clarify the foundations of arithmetic; ... Founding arithmetic<br />

upon a series of formal [!] definitions from which all theorems of<br />

that science can be purely syllogistically derived, that is Frcgc's<br />

ideal. 23<br />

Husserl's own account of (finite) cardinal numbers thus seeks to show<br />

that numbers have meaning, that we do have number concepts. But<br />

Husserl—unlike Frege—also holds that the concept of number cannot<br />

be defined, since we are dealing here with "ultimate, elementary<br />

concepts", where *[...] all defining comes to an end". 24 The way<br />

to grasp the meanings of these kinds of concepts therefore has to<br />

proceed by laying bare the type of abstraction as whose result these<br />

meanings emerge. 25<br />

In his Foundations of Arithmetic (1884) 26 Frege had made it<br />

clear that any attempt to base the concept of number on psychological<br />

considerations, that is, any attempt to let the concept of number<br />

emerge as an abstraction from concrete configurations of objects,<br />

runs into the problem of having to deal with different numbers in<br />

different ways. On the one hand, 0 and 1 are not multiplicities at<br />

all 27 : on the other hand, large numbers cannot be abstracted from<br />

concrete configurations of objects, since the respective multiplicities<br />

cannot be given as concrete configurations in intuition (Anschauung).<br />

Husserl accepts Frege's analysis but rejects its conclusion.<br />

For Husserl, the fact that a psychological investigation has to treat

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!