On the importance of a human-scale breadth of view: Reading Tallis’ freedom

IF 0.4 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Human Affairs-Postdisciplinary Humanities & Social Sciences Quarterly Pub Date : 2022-10-01 DOI:10.1515/humaff-2022-0038
Jan Halák
{"title":"On the importance of a human-scale breadth of view: Reading Tallis’ freedom","authors":"Jan Halák","doi":"10.1515/humaff-2022-0038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper is my commentary on Raymond Tallis’ book Freedom: An Impossible Reality (2021). Tallis argues that the laws described by science are dependent on human agency which extracts them from nature. Consequently, human agency cannot be explained as an effect of natural laws. I agree with Tallis’ main argument and I appreciate that he helps us understand the systematic importance of a human-scale breadth of view regarding any theoretical investigation. In the main part of the paper, I critically comment on Tallis’ interpretation of several more loosely associated topics from a phenomenological perspective. Firstly, I reconsider Tallis’ account of intentionality as a factor that opens a distance between the cognizer and the world. Whereas Tallis emphasizes that agency requisitions aspects of the world to achieve its goals, I point out that agency does not determine the meaning of things unidirectionally and independently of all context. A self-controlled agency is provisionally reached through a process of ‘deindexicalization’ of our passive intentional capacities, that is, by creating and maintaining new, different worldly contexts. Subsequently, I analyze Tallis’ description of our intentional relation to spatiotemporally distant possibilities. In my view, Tallis underestimates the extent to which our intentional relation to possibilities is pre-reflexive and pre-predicative and hence independent of propositional attitudes. Finally, I consider Tallis’ interpretation of nature and show that it is deeply influenced by the sciences of nature. In contrast, I argue that agency can be properly described only if we understand it as an intervention in a lifeworld already imbued with sense, not merely a physical or material nature.","PeriodicalId":44829,"journal":{"name":"Human Affairs-Postdisciplinary Humanities & Social Sciences Quarterly","volume":"32 1","pages":"439 - 452"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Affairs-Postdisciplinary Humanities & Social Sciences Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/humaff-2022-0038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract This paper is my commentary on Raymond Tallis’ book Freedom: An Impossible Reality (2021). Tallis argues that the laws described by science are dependent on human agency which extracts them from nature. Consequently, human agency cannot be explained as an effect of natural laws. I agree with Tallis’ main argument and I appreciate that he helps us understand the systematic importance of a human-scale breadth of view regarding any theoretical investigation. In the main part of the paper, I critically comment on Tallis’ interpretation of several more loosely associated topics from a phenomenological perspective. Firstly, I reconsider Tallis’ account of intentionality as a factor that opens a distance between the cognizer and the world. Whereas Tallis emphasizes that agency requisitions aspects of the world to achieve its goals, I point out that agency does not determine the meaning of things unidirectionally and independently of all context. A self-controlled agency is provisionally reached through a process of ‘deindexicalization’ of our passive intentional capacities, that is, by creating and maintaining new, different worldly contexts. Subsequently, I analyze Tallis’ description of our intentional relation to spatiotemporally distant possibilities. In my view, Tallis underestimates the extent to which our intentional relation to possibilities is pre-reflexive and pre-predicative and hence independent of propositional attitudes. Finally, I consider Tallis’ interpretation of nature and show that it is deeply influenced by the sciences of nature. In contrast, I argue that agency can be properly described only if we understand it as an intervention in a lifeworld already imbued with sense, not merely a physical or material nature.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
论人类视野的重要性——解读塔利斯的自由
摘要本文是我对Raymond Tallis的著作《自由:不可能的现实》(2021)的评论。Tallis认为,科学所描述的规律依赖于从自然中提取出来的人类能动性。因此,人类能动性不能被解释为自然规律的影响。我同意Tallis的主要论点,我很感激他帮助我们理解在任何理论调查中,人类视野广度的系统重要性。在论文的主要部分,我从现象学的角度批判性地评论了塔利斯对几个更松散关联的主题的解释。首先,我重新考虑塔利斯对意向性的描述,认为意向性是一个打开认知者与世界之间距离的因素。Tallis强调,能动性要求世界的各个方面来实现其目标,而我指出,能动性并不能单向地、独立于所有背景来决定事物的意义。一个自我控制的机构是通过我们被动有意能力的“去指数化”过程暂时达到的,也就是说,通过创造和维持新的、不同的世界环境。随后,我分析了塔利斯对我们与时空遥远可能性的有意关系的描述。在我看来,Tallis低估了我们与可能性的有意关系在多大程度上是前反射性和前表语性的,因此独立于命题态度。最后,我考虑了塔利斯对自然的解释,并表明它深受自然科学的影响。相反,我认为,只有当我们将能动性理解为对已经充满意义的生活世界的干预,而不仅仅是物理或物质性质时,才能正确地描述能动性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
25.00%
发文量
41
期刊最新文献
Frontmatter Audience Democracy 2.0: Re-Depersonalizing Politics in the Digital Age Kasanda, A. and Hrubec, M. (Eds.): Africa in a Multilateral World. Afropolitan Dilemmas. New York, London: Routledge. Routledge Contemporary Africa Series, 2022. Back from the Future. Remarks on Temporality and Totality in the Birth of Classical German Philosophy Philosophy and Jena Romanticism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1