cosmic world, and Nietzschean nihilism, which also makes man lose his root<strong>ed</strong>ness in atranscendent sphere.Without denying the fundamental pertinence of Jonas’s analysis, as far as the existentialontology of Being and time is concern<strong>ed</strong>, 4 we would like to call into question theexhaustiveness of his approach with regard to the historical context. In reading Jonas’sbook, one could <strong>com</strong>e to consider Heidegger as the only philosopher of his time whodevelop<strong>ed</strong> a radically dualistic vision of human subjectivity, the idea of a metanoia froman inauthentic form of existence, or a more or less gnostic concept of temporality. Noallusion is made, either to the neo-Kantian school, or to Husserl’s phenomenology, thoughboth have much in <strong>com</strong>mon with these Heideggerian topics and could be rank<strong>ed</strong> asbelonging to modern “Gnosticism,” according to the criteria establish<strong>ed</strong> by Jonashimself. 5 In the following, we will limit ourselves to the phenomenological aspects of theproblem and will point out in what sense Husserl’s transcendental approach -- crystalliz<strong>ed</strong>in the notion of epoché -- could be consider<strong>ed</strong> an even more radical example of modern“Gnosticism” than Heidegger’s existential ontology. In the second part of this paper, wewill try to show how -- by assigning to transcendental phenomenology a leading functionin the teleological (but inner-worldly) achievements of humanity -- Husserl avoids th<strong>ed</strong>isastrous practical consequences of a crypto-gnostic dualism.The Gnostic Dimension of Transcendental PhenomenologyPhenomenology, Science, and the “World”Husserl’s approach, unlike that of classical Gnosticism, displays its dualistic tendenciesessentially in the context of a theory of scientific thought. At least in its primary sense, therift between “naive belief” and “true knowl<strong>ed</strong>ge,” between “fallen-ness” and “conversion”or “awakening,” does not divide into two forms of existence -- concerning all humanbeings alike -- but rather, into two fundamentally different ways of realizing the scientificideal of theoretical knowl<strong>ed</strong>ge.4Of course, one should not forget that in other writings of roughly the same period (1928-1929),the “gnostic” dimension of Heidegger’s thought is far less clear or easy to recognize. Although hecontinues to insist on Dasein’s particular mode of being, the philosophical concept of “world,” conceiv<strong>ed</strong>as a synonym of Dasein’s original transcendence, is subsequently purg<strong>ed</strong> of all negative connotations,especially of those relat<strong>ed</strong> to the Christian-dualistic use of this notion, like, for instance, in the Gospel ofSt John or in St Augustine. See Martin Heidegger, “Vom Wesen des Grundes,” in Wegmarken, GA9(Frankfurt a.M.: Klostermann, 1976), 144-145.5Concerning the gnostic structure of temporality, that is essentially bas<strong>ed</strong> on the devaluation of thepresent in favor of the future and the past, one is astound<strong>ed</strong> to read in Hermann Cohen’s Logik der reinenErkenntnis a passage that could almost have been taken for an ante litteram quotation from Being andtime: “It is the future which contains and reveals the characteristics of time. The anticipat<strong>ed</strong> future isclosely follow<strong>ed</strong> and trail<strong>ed</strong> by the past. What <strong>com</strong>es first, is not the past but the future, against whichthe past stands out. … But then, where do we find the present, which we are us<strong>ed</strong> to think of as a fix<strong>ed</strong>point? It is anything but that; it hovers between points in a row, a row form<strong>ed</strong> from such fix<strong>ed</strong> points, andconsists in the hovering between an anticipat<strong>ed</strong> future and a catching up with it, its resonance, the past.”“Die Zukunft enthält und enthüllt den Charakter der Zeit. An die antizipierte Zukunft reiht sich, rankt sichdie Vergangenheit. Sie war nicht zuerst; sondern zuerst ist die Zukunft, von der sich die Vergangenheitabhebt. …Wo bleibt denn aber die Gegenwart, die man als den festen Punkt anzusehen pflegt? Sie istnichts weniger als dieses; sie schwebt in der Reihe, welche von jenen Punkten l<strong>ed</strong>iglich gebildet wird, siebesteht in dem Schweben zwischen der antizipierten Zukunft und deren Nachholung, deren Abklang, derVergangenheit.” Hermann Cohen, Logik der reinen Erkenntnis, 2d <strong>ed</strong>. (Berlin: B. Cassirer, 1914), 154-155; the translation is ours, the italics are Cohen’s.222
From the very beginning, Husserl’s phenomenology is characteriz<strong>ed</strong> by its oppositionto all kind of contemporary scientific r<strong>ed</strong>uctionism. If the qualitative distinction betweenpure logic on the one hand, and appli<strong>ed</strong> logic or psychology on the other, is the leitmotivof the first part of his Logical Investigations, 6 his Ideas I establishes phenomenologyitself as an absolutely autonomous kind of science that differs both from formal logic andfrom the various material and formal ontologies which govern the object-regions of thenatural and the human sciences. 7 The “region” proper to phenomenology is no longer justpart, a more or less fragmentary part, of a homogeneous extension: it is the result of aradical change in attitude with regard to the order of dependence between “pure consciousness”and the “world” as the totality of all possible objects. Whereas “reality,” inits broadest sense, is “purely nothing” 8 apart from also being a phenomenon perceiv<strong>ed</strong>by consciousness, the immanent sphere of the pure ego is radically heterogeneous anddifferent from everything that is “transcendent,” i.e., from everything that is not intrinsicto the act of consciousness itself.The fundamental gnostic concepts of kosmos, psyché and pneuma (or their Germanequivalents Welt, Seele and Geist) also play a key role in phenomenology; their significationand mutual relationship, however, is slightly different from the classical gnosticschema. Though Husserl, on the one hand, does not fail to emphasize the differencebetween transcendental phenomenology and psychology as the science of the empiricalego, he maintains, on the other hand, an important distinction between empirical psychologyand the rest of the natural sciences: both phenomenology and psychology deal withinternal perceptions, which, unlike the external objects of the natural sciences, are inaccessibleto inter-subjective verification. Without relapsing into psychologism, Husserlgoes so far as to say that psychology is in a privileg<strong>ed</strong> relation to phenomenology, sinceall of its phenomena have their correlate in the sphere of pure subjectivity. 9 Thus, insteadof the ancient dichotomy kosmos / psyché versus pneuma, Husserl introduces a tripartit<strong>ed</strong>ivision by establishing first a distinction between the “natural” and the “intentional”before separating the intentionally structur<strong>ed</strong>, empirical subjectivity from the pure egowhose a priori structure includes the possibility, in equal measure, of being intentionallyrelat<strong>ed</strong> to transcendent or to transcendentally modifi<strong>ed</strong> phenomena.The radical asymmetry -- between the “immanent” and the “transcendent” within thesphere of transcendental subjectivity -- is not limit<strong>ed</strong> to the single act of consciousness;it also entails a dichotomy between the subject-pole and the laws that govern the differentrealms of phenomena. If “nature” does not mean anything in itself, but is the name givento a certain form of coherence within the sphere of external and sensible phenomena, 10then pure consciousness itself can never be subject to any of these merely factual laws.Like the “pneumatic man” of ancient Gnosticism, who is independent of the “mundane,”cosmic nomos or heimarmené, 11 Husserl’s transcendental subjectivity is free of anycausal or “real” connection with the world of things; 12 it is both autonomous in itself and6See Edmund Husserl, Logische Untersuchungen, Erster Teil: Prolegomena zur reinen Logik,Husserliana XVIII (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1975), 44-62, §§ 13-16. (Henceforth quot<strong>ed</strong> as Hua.)7See Edmund Husserl, Ideen zur einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischenPhilosophie, Erstes Buch, Husserliana III/1, 2d <strong>ed</strong>. (The Hague: Nijhoff, 1976), 66-69; 125-127, §§ 33.59. (Henceforth quot<strong>ed</strong> as Hua.)8Ibid., 106, § 49.9See Edmund Husserl, “Philosophie als strenge Wissenschaft,” in idem, Aufsätze und Vorträge(1911-1921), Hua XXV (Dordrecht/ Boston/ Lancaster: Nijhoff, 1987), 17.10See Husserl, Ideen zur einer reinen Phänomenologie, 108, § 51.11See Jonas, The Gnostic Religion, 328.12See Husserl, Ideen zur einer reinen Phänomenologie, 105.223
- Page 6 and 7:
various forms of idealist philosoph
- Page 8:
self-givenness (Selbstgegebenheit)
- Page 12:
It must be admitted in this regard
- Page 18 and 19:
down and all the way back.” 51 Fo
- Page 20 and 21:
Heidegger characterized his own pro
- Page 22 and 23:
Heidegger’s transcendental-existe
- Page 24 and 25:
perceived world” (PP, 25), Merlea
- Page 26 and 27:
in the unreflected, in “perceptio
- Page 28 and 29:
Nor would Merleau-Ponty have had an
- Page 32 and 33:
a way that we do not all crash into
- Page 34 and 35:
“I think” but in “the dialogu
- Page 36 and 37:
in existence a “super-abundance o
- Page 38 and 39:
crucial “other” in our becoming
- Page 40 and 41:
to its being grounded in terms of b
- Page 42 and 43:
(“History is this quasi-‘thing
- Page 44 and 45:
manner (statistical or regression a
- Page 46 and 47:
and they are such, precisely becaus
- Page 48 and 49:
interpreted the world, and that the
- Page 50 and 51:
is not rationalist or idealist in t
- Page 52 and 53:
title Herbert Spiegelberg gave to h
- Page 55:
II.TOWARD A TELOS OF SIGNIFYING COM
- Page 59 and 60:
published in Being and Having. 12 T
- Page 61 and 62:
inside me which makes me able to re
- Page 63 and 64:
or is not existence something that
- Page 65 and 66:
ReflectionPhilosophical thought is
- Page 67 and 68:
attempt at unification, the reflect
- Page 69 and 70:
thereof. And an ethical aspect: tha
- Page 71 and 72:
According to Ricoeur, “It is here
- Page 74 and 75:
the most meaningful contemporary sw
- Page 76 and 77:
ival hermeneutics that we perceive
- Page 78 and 79:
more pronounced recoil whereby the
- Page 80 and 81:
these structures throughout the who
- Page 82 and 83:
By seeking a deeper unity of Dasein
- Page 84 and 85:
folds a pre-given set of possibilit
- Page 86 and 87:
of experience is correlated to a pa
- Page 88 and 89:
explanations of causal events in th
- Page 90 and 91:
accept one argument over another. A
- Page 92 and 93:
a subtle dialectic between argument
- Page 94 and 95:
or warrant an assertion. Such fulfi
- Page 96 and 97:
the assertive vehemence of the hist
- Page 98 and 99:
positions of the subject. For memor
- Page 100 and 101:
attestation slips a plurality, most
- Page 102 and 103:
What confidence in the word of othe
- Page 104 and 105:
From where, perhaps, the place of t
- Page 106 and 107:
Sans le correctif du commandement d
- Page 108 and 109:
life), Rembrandt proposes an interp
- Page 110 and 111:
only as a place made for oneself as
- Page 113:
III.THE HERMENEUTIC PHENOMENOLOGY O
- Page 116 and 117:
consolidated by terming it an “un
- Page 118 and 119:
If our analysis is correct, the “
- Page 120 and 121:
The esthesiology of the senses of t
- Page 122 and 123:
in certain cases, together with the
- Page 124 and 125:
what the touched hand recognizes wh
- Page 126 and 127:
heart; a presence where a lived tak
- Page 128 and 129:
conceives it, not on the basis of n
- Page 130 and 131:
Merleau-Ponty, a form, a relation o
- Page 132 and 133:
out in “Eye and Mind.” So, let
- Page 134 and 135:
God creates, or better, draws, a
- Page 136 and 137:
the “there,” the “one same sp
- Page 138 and 139:
free to function more purely as a p
- Page 140 and 141:
close grasp of the sleight of the h
- Page 142 and 143:
understood both as discursive thoug
- Page 144 and 145:
While Henry thus questions “the m
- Page 146 and 147:
is able to persist in the undergoin
- Page 148 and 149:
“remember,” but not as I would
- Page 150 and 151:
intentionally structured self-consc
- Page 152 and 153:
life can ultimately be defined in i
- Page 154 and 155:
4. THE SUBJECTIVE BODY AND THE IDEA
- Page 156 and 157:
and the represented body (the combi
- Page 158 and 159:
The Oversight of Life’s OneselfTh
- Page 160 and 161:
more than externality and its unfol
- Page 162 and 163:
effort if this effort gives rise to
- Page 164 and 165:
manifest in the self-givenness of l
- Page 166 and 167:
Transcendental affectivity 71 is th
- Page 168 and 169:
The pursuit of health, strongly rei
- Page 170 and 171:
each the prey of their own pathos.
- Page 172 and 173:
According to views held by Gadamer
- Page 174 and 175: and writing - the tools which human
- Page 176 and 177: or disclosedness (Erschlossenheit)
- Page 178 and 179: exclusively from his own point of v
- Page 180 and 181: the same direction as practical wis
- Page 182 and 183: of ‘art’ which still stands bef
- Page 184 and 185: Gadamer’s approach, however, is n
- Page 186 and 187: of biology and physiology, or they
- Page 189: IV.PHENOMENOLOGICAL MOMENTS IN THE
- Page 192 and 193: Therefore, I would like to concentr
- Page 194 and 195: classical Greek tradition of thinki
- Page 196 and 197: This uneasiness in human beings, wh
- Page 198 and 199: appears in the way of its appearanc
- Page 200 and 201: We can sense such a philosophical d
- Page 202 and 203: the act of interpreting, except whe
- Page 204 and 205: phenomenological development. The p
- Page 206 and 207: II.A Liberation, With a Meeting in
- Page 208 and 209: denken lässt -, sondern das Leben:
- Page 210 and 211: Sinn” 17 and, following this: “
- Page 212 and 213: Wenn ich dieses Buch sehe, sehe ich
- Page 214 and 215: Der christlich-jüdische Gott ist d
- Page 216 and 217: 3. A “BETTER” OR JUST “ANOTHE
- Page 218 and 219: if we have two persons, a master an
- Page 221: V.THE ARCHEOLOGY OF HERMENEUTIC PHE
- Page 226 and 227: absolute lawgiver to any possible
- Page 228 and 229: solitude.” 26 If there is a “hi
- Page 230 and 231: of reason, as far as the single hum
- Page 232 and 233: transcendental reason, 46 pure rati
- Page 234 and 235: and properties of sensible phenomen
- Page 236 and 237: In clear distantiation from his own
- Page 238 and 239: 2. HISTORY AS THE OTHER -- NOTES ON
- Page 240 and 241: precisely the accomplishment of phe
- Page 242 and 243: ought as such into the present, it
- Page 244 and 245: educed state. As soon as the reflec
- Page 246 and 247: explicitly in the Vienna lecture, w
- Page 248 and 249: the task and the very environment o
- Page 250 and 251: stood “from itself.” As a resul
- Page 252 and 253: makes possible the further interpre
- Page 254 and 255: of Being -- already grown into Bein
- Page 256 and 257: the Husserlian idea of phenomenolog
- Page 258 and 259: into the openness of Being, it diff
- Page 260 and 261: We now need to quote a second, well
- Page 262 and 263: “knowledge about the world.” In
- Page 264 and 265: Husserl’s ConversionsTheological
- Page 266 and 267: And this proved, probably, to be a
- Page 268 and 269: Husserl’s Reflective Phenomenolog
- Page 270 and 271: to beings of the same nature. But t
- Page 272 and 273: worldlessness of Husserl’s intent
- Page 274 and 275:
According to Aristotle, intellectio
- Page 276 and 277:
6. RIGOR AND ORIGINARITY: THE TRANS
- Page 278 and 279:
The latter, the nonessential princi
- Page 280 and 281:
that, for Husserl, every act is ind
- Page 282 and 283:
not forget what Husserl meant by a-
- Page 284 and 285:
things, we shall comprehend by intu
- Page 286 and 287:
something,’ is not merely there (
- Page 288 and 289:
epoché in Husserl become a hermene
- Page 290 and 291:
When Heidegger characterizes world-