Philosophy is different from other things, and it is very important to learn from it, especially after modern times, which is very difficult for an amateur philosopher. In aesthetics class, I only said a little about Husserl, not that he is unimportant, but that Husserl's phenomenology is too complicated and difficult.
Starting from epistemology, he is actually the same as Kant, but he initiated the development of a phenomenological method. At the same time, this method is not only a methodology, not only an epistemology, but also an ontology, or ontology. He solved the problem of epistemology by phenomenological method. Because of his pioneering work, he encountered many problems, constantly revised them and wrote countless introductions. His works are also very numerous, which may be close to 65,438+000, similar to Heidegger's. Heidegger's papers have basically been published, while Husserl's works have not been completely published, including German.
Look at things related to philosophy and pay a little attention to the age of philosophers, and you will probably know. He was born in the 1960s from 1859 to 1938, and then to 1938. At the beginning of World War II, Hitler came to power. During Hitler's coming to power, he was persecuted and deprived of many teaching qualifications.
This book is called Ontology of Meaning. We know that there are many ontologies. God and God are the ontologies of religion or religious philosophy, and there are also ontologies of materialism and idealism. The ontologies are different. Husserl thinks ontology is meaning. How did the meaning come from? How did it happen?
At that time, Husserl had several big changes. Hegel was criticized from Schopenhauer to Nietzsche. Everyone proposed to return to Kant, who is the largest school of philosophy, similar to Heidegger. Kant's philosophy is forward-looking, just like the reservoir of the future. If you want to learn philosophy, you have to take water from this reservoir, whether you agree with him or not. At that time, Neo-Kantism prevailed in Husserl, and he was deeply influenced by it.
Husserl discovered some problems in Kant's philosophy, and Kant's basic starting point is the dichotomy of subject and object. Husserl's study of Kant's philosophy certainly includes his original foundation. He is a Ph.D. student in mathematics and studies psychology with brentano. Brentano himself was a philosopher, and he combined Kant's philosophy. His step-by-step exploration is very difficult, and he keeps revising one by one, so each version of his works is different, just like a serious philosophy. You said it at first, but it has always been like this. If it becomes a doctrine, it may be a bit problematic as a philosophy. Are you a kind of setting, and then go on to explain, one link is very tight, which just shows that your thinking may not have any development.
We start with the theory of intentionality on the first page, and phenomenology is a research method. How can we study phenomenology? Because it matters. Once methodology changes, epistemology changes, epistemology changes and ontology changes. Husserl also said that phenomenology, whether as a philosophical theory of consciousness, as a method or as a special form to describe human consciousness, is only an intentional theory.
Intentionality shows the basic nature of consciousness. This special consciousness is not what we usually call what I realized, what I know and what I saw. But a pure consciousness, something thrown away from complex expression, or something set, so he has a suspension. This is not a psychological mechanism. I know what I think of a tree. I think I am happy or not. He didn't mean that, but the basic nature and structure of your consciousness itself, just like a production line. I'm not talking about the process. How to assemble the first process and how to equip the second set of tools? Not this, but the production line itself. What he said is the basic nature of pure consciousness, including the basic nature of structure. All the problems he has learned now come from this, from this intentional theory or intentional theory. So Husserl's phenomenology is a headache. First of all, we should grasp the theory of intentionality, and then phenomenology is reductive, suspended and intuitive in nature. Skip the theory of intentionality, you can't understand it at all.
Many people put the cart before the horse. What is ontology? The word "Ben" is not the following thing, but the cross inside the wooden word. It is the core thing, not that the root is its root, but that the essence of the tree is its root. We can say that seeds are the roots of trees, but we can't say that roots are the roots of trees. This is the core. The same is true of philosophy. Its ontology does not mean that there is a foundation below.
The word intentionality comes from Latin intender and medieval philosophy. Husserl accepted this concept from brentano before15th century. Brentano believes that various phenomena in the world can be divided into two categories: physical phenomena and psychological phenomena. What is external to man is a physical phenomenon, and what is internal to man is a psychological phenomenon. Physical phenomena include color, sound and so on. We later discovered that red is actually light waves, and neither particles nor light waves are red, especially sound. Sound is the vibration of sound waves, not sound.
How did these external things become conscious things? For example, taking pictures, the camera is similar to the human eye, it has exposure, and after exposure, it becomes a series of numbers. The electronic number is recorded in this hard disk. It's not that a tree, a mobile phone and a computer are all photographed. It obviously doesn't know that it is a tree, but it is a string of numbers to it.
Including artificial intelligence, it doesn't even know it's a tree. Only when we see a tree will it have a meaning, that is, I know something, and this is the meaning, the broadest meaning, and knowing it means knowing the meaning.
Most domestic scholars think that Husserl's phenomenology is a philosophy about meaning, while western scholars rarely say so. I think this is a question from the perspective of the East and the West, which is easy for people in China to understand. I think this is also a fact, because what you want to know is that this meaning is the most important and absolutely meaningless, and it does not enter people's understanding.
It's absolutely meaningless, and he doesn't exist, which is equivalent to giving a color to a blind person. If you don't see it, it doesn't exist, so it's about meaning. On the contrary, there is nothing in the west, and science and thinking seem to be more solidified. But Husserl must be very clear. He kept asking questions about meaning. He didn't discuss it directly, but it was everywhere. Including Heidegger, who always talks about existence, he doesn't want to say what existence is, but what is the meaning of existence?
Husserl, too, how to understand the meaning of cognition is obviously not psychology. I think it is a tree, or I think it is a grass. That's not true, but it was presented to me directly. What's the point? For example, a tree is obviously not a series of light spots or a series of light waves. What does it show me? You said a tree appeared in my mind and consciousness, Husserl said, please wait a moment, don't say so in a hurry.
You say that because you know something that hasn't been cleaned up. For example, if you are a botanist, you say it is a pine tree, you are a timber merchant, and you say it is good wood, which is subjective. Then ask the pure consciousness phenomenon, what is directly given to us? It can't be wood, pine, or even any class, order or genus. There must be something more primitive, so Husserl's phenomenology calls it pure consciousness, which is the most direct thing to give us consciousness. This is what reduction means, complete reduction. Don't judge yet, let's take a good look at what has happened.
When we face a tree, don't rush to say that it is a tree, and see what appears in my pure consciousness. This is the purest and can't be wrong. This is self-evident. What appears is what appears, which is 100% truth. As the starting point of a study, this is the most reliable, not to say that it is either the subject or the object. What do you mean by subject and object? The problem is that of course I saw it was a tree. I am a man with certain knowledge, and I know it is a thing without knowledge. This is called subjectivity. What is objectivity? A tree is a tree. Whether you know it or not, it is a tree. This is called objectivity. Husserl said that both of your statements are wrong. Let's take a look at the original things first.
What is the most direct absolute truth that is absolutely self-evident? Husserl and his students have developed many related phenomenological studies and formed a phenomenological movement, which is a huge ideological trend, sweeping the ideological circle to all aspects and even the architectural art world. It is precisely because of its revolutionary nature that its thoroughness is reflected in this place. He reduced it to the most self-evident thing, that is, what was directly revealed in my pure consciousness and what was directly given.
This is neither subjective nor objective, but the most self-evident thing that is absolutely given. Let's start here.
Strictly speaking, there is no color or sound. Only those who look at colors and listen to sounds, psychological phenomenon is a kind of internal perception phenomenon, and it is a self-evident perception phenomenon in consciousness. This is a valuable idea of brentano. Only psychological phenomenon is the real existence. Logically speaking, there can be no truth or falsehood in the material world. He specifically mentioned stones and trees. It doesn't matter whether it's true or not. He has no question of truth or falsehood. Of course, there is no question of authenticity. He can only be true or not.
A tree in his mind may be wrong, but you regard it as a monster, but for the tree itself, he doesn't care whether it is true or not, so it doesn't matter whether it is true or not. Therefore, there is neither an objective world nor a transcendental subjective world, but a psychological phenomenon. Kant's philosophy says that the subject knows the object. For example, if I know a tree, I can only see the wavelength of the color, right? Then how do I know? I do recognize it as a tree, mainly because I have a transcendental thing, and everyone has this thing before going through it, a congenital thing. Then you can understand it. This is called something innate, something that precedes experience, and Kant's judgment comes from this. How on earth did you know about that innate thing? Those wavelengths, sound waves, and several senses, Kant thinks that transcendental imagination has integrated them. How to integrate imagination? As Kant said, this is an integrated graphic way.
The foundation of Kant's philosophy is not very rigorous, so I don't want to elaborate here. Husserl further developed from brentano, and brentano pointed out that this intentionality is self-evident, just from the perspective of psychology. Brentano thinks that universal correctness is the natural result of self-evident internal experience, and I have it in my heart, so it is self-evident and a bit rough. It also has reduction, so it must belong to psychological research. The general characteristics of psychological phenomena are intentionality and the relationship between intention and something. Once I know something, it must have an intentional direction, and it is also a two-way direction for me. This is why you realize that this intention is actually intentional, that is, I am facing it and it is facing me.
But Husserl went further. He thinks this is not self-evident, because you are still a subject, surpassing you. For example, I look at the tree and I face the tree. Husserl said, first you are endowed with something in your mind, and then you go beyond it. There is indeed a tree outside my consciousness. We should restore, don't rush to judge that there is a tree outside me, but say something in my consciousness first, and then there is a tree outside me besides this foundation. These two are definitely related, but you can't generally say that I saw a tree just because I was facing a tree, so I knew it. You can't say that.
Husserl changed this intentionality from the inside out to be directly endowed with pure consciousness. Consciousness has two parts, one is self-awareness and the other is reflection. The intentionality of Husserl's transformation is that consciousness faces consciousness, which regards consciousness as the object, and consciousness is absolutely given. Taking this as a starting point, let us find that as this phenomenological method, everything that is set is really excluded without any interference.
Let me sum up the above, that is to say, what is given in pure consciousness is called phenomenon, and what is given is called phenomenon. This phenomenon can definitely withstand any scrutiny, because it goes without saying. I suddenly have something here, so I will start with it instead of looking at things other than me. In that case, I already have a plan. Both Kant's philosophy and brentano's psychological philosophy have problems.
Husserl's phenomenology refers to the phenomenon of pure consciousness, rather than the phenomenon of life and society that we usually say. There are many phenomena in newspaper news, and we can see many phenomena when we go to the streets. He is not talking about these phenomena, nor is it the phenomenon that I eat, nor is it the phenomenon that my children go to school. Good performance is not a phenomenon that is absolutely endowed in pure consciousness, which is the starting point of all philosophy. Heidegger further transformed it.
Most students think Husserl's phenomenological reduction method is thorough and reasonable. Why did Heidegger break it? Husserl's phenomenology, including Kant's phenomenology, is based on epistemology, and there is bound to be the problem of opposition between subject and object, which is what we usually call objectification. Husserl said that the phenomenon absolutely given in pure consciousness has no subject and no object. But this philosophy is problematic in the future. It still sets an invisible me, which he calls transcendence. Beyond this experience of self. Since there is such a phenomenon, I have to understand it. I must know it, although it is the understanding of consciousness to consciousness.
Husserl said that the first consciousness is transcendental self, also called innate self, which is equivalent to a virtual self. Always consciously understand what is conscious. Transcendental self, in the final analysis, is actually a subject, which is opposite to external things, so that it finally comes to the opposition between subject and object. I am different from a tree, and there is always opposition. You can know the phenomenon, or you can know me through the phenomenon. It is true that there is a tree outside me, but how can the subject and object be unified? The tree can't know, it is dead, and people can know when they are alive. How to unify? This has buried a big problem. Anyway, as long as the subject and object are opposite, hidden or direct, Kant is direct, and I am the opposition of subject and object, there will always be a problem that is difficult to solve and cross, so Heidegger develops further.
In the last paragraph of the second page, Husserl's theory of intentionality first adopted brentano's view that all consciousness points to an object or intention, that is, it must be meaningful to point to an object, otherwise you will see some light spots but nothing, and animals can also see light spots. What is the difference? Husserl doesn't mean a real object, such as the tree outside me. Husserl said, I'm not pointing to that thing, or pointing to the actual spirit that accompanies consciousness and pointing to action.
Husserl's intentionality is not that intentionality, but the abstract connotation structure referred to by consciousness, that is, pure consciousness. There is a simulation of linguistic significance in brackets behind him. He is actually very close to what we are talking about now. We often say that images are the language of images, and images without language are not real images. Language is the language of images, and language without images is not a real language, not a pure language, with similar meanings. Here he also involves language problems.
This intentional structure, he also linked this with language. He thinks the two are very close. If you don't, you can't say. If you say it, there must be something. You didn't say it out of thin air or talk nonsense. Nonsense also has a purpose. Without absolute nonsense, it is not a language. For example, dreams are terrible, your voice is meaningful, because you are afraid and you have intentions. Whether it is his original intention or the image I said, he also linked this.
If brentano's intentionality is a kind of psychological intentionality, I go outside to know a tree, and Husserl's intentionality is an intentional meaning, which is absolutely given. In essence, the word "intention" has nothing to do with the usual intention, and the intention is external. I want to know something other than me, which is called intention. I want to see and know. What is the darkness opposite me? Intentionality here involves a basic epistemological problem. The purpose of Husserl's intentional scholarship is to describe the essence of consciousness, including the structure of course, that is, this pure consciousness.
In daily language expression, digging deep meaning or conceptual structure, how I like it, how I expect it, and how I doubt it, all contain this thing. Why do you say that? Husserl also involves some survival problems. Very practical. For example, I haven't seen the president of the United States, but I can imagine, or I can judge or doubt, how to judge, for example, the president of the United States, maybe three months later.
Then when I said this, I didn't really know who the president was. What am I suspecting? Am I idling? No, it also has its intentional structure. Simply put, why do you involve everyday language? Therefore, Husserl's philosophy seems difficult to understand, but it is also very close and starts from a more everyday place. But he will definitely jump out, certainly not the kind of phenomenon we usually say. He must quickly turn from these ordinary daily phenomena we are talking about to his pure phenomenon, otherwise, it will become a kind of psychology, and it will not be called philosophy.
The last sentence of this paragraph is very important, and you can remember it, otherwise you may not say anything after listening to a class. Husserl said that the main research object of phenomenology is consciousness, that is, pure consciousness, and its research object is this, not outside me, but also outside me. If you read some of his theories or related philosophical history later, you will know that he must have insisted on it, otherwise how can you explain the world? But his main research object, starting point and core are consciousness or pure consciousness, or pure consciousness phenomenon. What is pure consciousness without phenomena? It's empty. His main research object is this pure consciousness.
Let me briefly summarize. One of Husserl's core things, the starting point is intentionality theory, which involves pure consciousness, that is, it is not something outside my consciousness, but something inside my consciousness. Phenomenology refers to the phenomenon of pure consciousness, not the general phenomenon of opposition between subject and object. Thirdly, the image I said is also a phenomenon of pure consciousness, which is actually pure consciousness, but this image we are talking about is different from him, that is to say, it is not epistemology, but an ontology, which is closer to Heidegger's ontology.
This writing theory, the theory of image flow writing, is simply the China version and the revised version of Heidegger's ontology, and the transformation is that I transform his existence into an image. China's traditional aesthetics and philosophy, including literature, image is a common word and a relatively core concept, because almost all the core words in China's philosophical aesthetics and literature are image, artistic conception, verve or spirit.
Philosophy often says that Qi, Tao, Reason and Tao are the noumenon of China's philosophy, and Reason is the logic of China's philosophy, so it is called Reason. Nowadays, the arts and sciences, reason is rational, literature is a kind of grain and astronomy. Its characteristics are called reason and texture when you say it. One thing is to show its texture, which is called astronomy. It must be rational, which is similar to many things in western philosophy. People's thinking must be like this, and so is western philosophy. That absolutely eternal thing, whether it is God, God or any concept, or the existence of ontology, must be revealed. If it is shown, it must be textured. So what does it mean? This is the text. Is the reason to say it.
Husserl stopped here.