理想的全时空性

IF 1.2 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY REVIEW Pub Date : 2024-02-22 DOI:10.1007/s11007-024-09629-3
James Sares
{"title":"理想的全时空性","authors":"James Sares","doi":"10.1007/s11007-024-09629-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article develops an interpretation and defense of Husserl’s account of the omnitemporality of idealities. I first examine why Husserl rejects the atemporality and temporal individuation of idealities on phenomenological grounds, specifically that these attributions prove countersensical in how they relate idealities to consciousness. As an alternative to these conceptions, I develop a two-sided interpretation of omnitemporality expressed in modal terms of actuality and possibility; the actual referring to appearances in time and the possible, to reactivation at any time, on phenomenological grounds. In defense of this interpretation of omnitemporality, I consider influential criticisms against Husserl’s account of idealities as they concern time, particularly whether the historical genesis of idealities compromises their omnitemporality by binding them to time. Ultimately, I argue that the transcendental historicity of idealities, despite being relevant to the question of validity and access, proves indifferent to their omnitemporality.</p>","PeriodicalId":45310,"journal":{"name":"CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The omnitemporality of idealities\",\"authors\":\"James Sares\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11007-024-09629-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This article develops an interpretation and defense of Husserl’s account of the omnitemporality of idealities. I first examine why Husserl rejects the atemporality and temporal individuation of idealities on phenomenological grounds, specifically that these attributions prove countersensical in how they relate idealities to consciousness. As an alternative to these conceptions, I develop a two-sided interpretation of omnitemporality expressed in modal terms of actuality and possibility; the actual referring to appearances in time and the possible, to reactivation at any time, on phenomenological grounds. In defense of this interpretation of omnitemporality, I consider influential criticisms against Husserl’s account of idealities as they concern time, particularly whether the historical genesis of idealities compromises their omnitemporality by binding them to time. Ultimately, I argue that the transcendental historicity of idealities, despite being relevant to the question of validity and access, proves indifferent to their omnitemporality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45310,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY REVIEW\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY REVIEW\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11007-024-09629-3\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11007-024-09629-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文对胡塞尔关于理想性的全时性的论述进行了阐释和辩护。我首先探讨了胡塞尔为什么以现象学的理由拒绝接受理想性的无时间性和时间个体化,特别是这些归因在如何将理想性与意识联系起来方面被证明是自相矛盾的。作为对这些概念的替代,我从现象学的角度出发,用实际性和可能性的模态术语对全时性进行了双面阐释;实际性指的是时间中的显现,而可能性指的是任何时间的重新激活。为了捍卫这种对全时性的阐释,我考虑了针对胡塞尔关于理想性的论述的有影响的批评,因为它们涉及时间,尤其是理想性的历史起源是否因将其与时间绑定而损害了其全时性。最后,我认为,理想性的超验历史性尽管与有效性和通达性问题相关,但却被证明与理想性的全时性无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The omnitemporality of idealities

This article develops an interpretation and defense of Husserl’s account of the omnitemporality of idealities. I first examine why Husserl rejects the atemporality and temporal individuation of idealities on phenomenological grounds, specifically that these attributions prove countersensical in how they relate idealities to consciousness. As an alternative to these conceptions, I develop a two-sided interpretation of omnitemporality expressed in modal terms of actuality and possibility; the actual referring to appearances in time and the possible, to reactivation at any time, on phenomenological grounds. In defense of this interpretation of omnitemporality, I consider influential criticisms against Husserl’s account of idealities as they concern time, particularly whether the historical genesis of idealities compromises their omnitemporality by binding them to time. Ultimately, I argue that the transcendental historicity of idealities, despite being relevant to the question of validity and access, proves indifferent to their omnitemporality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The central purpose of Continental Philosophy Review is to foster a living dialogue within the international community on philosophical issues of mutual interest. It seeks to elicit, discussions of fundamental philosophical problems and original approaches to them. Broadly encompassing in its focus, the journal invites essays on both expressly theoretical topics and topics dealing with practical problems that extend to the wider domain of socio-political life. It encourages explorations in the domains of art, morality, science and religion as they relate to specific philosophical concerns. Although not an advocate of any one trend or school in philosophy, the journal is especially committed to keeping abreast of developments within phenomenology and contemporary continental philosophy and is interested in investigations that probe possible points of intersection between the continental European and the Anglo-American traditions. Continental Philosophy Review contains review articles of recent, original works in philosophy. It provides considerable space for such reviews, allowing critics to develop their comments and assessments at some length.
期刊最新文献
Cassirer’s functionalist account of physical truth: object, measurement and technology Natural sciences, technology and foresight: an approach based on Ernst Cassirer’s symbol theory Mathematical sciences as symbolic form: the objects and objectivity of science in Ernst Cassirer’s philosophy of science and culture Gerontological difference: Tracing the ontological generativity of aging after Heidegger From care to solidarity
×
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