母鸡吃花粉。胡塞尔的自然变异论的起源与柏拉图与亚里士多德在宇宙论上的分歧

IF 0.3 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Studia Phaenomenologica Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.5840/studphaen2020206
A. Djian
{"title":"母鸡吃花粉。胡塞尔的自然变异论的起源与柏拉图与亚里士多德在宇宙论上的分歧","authors":"A. Djian","doi":"10.5840/studphaen2020206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is commonly known that Husserl’s eidetic variation is of paramount importance for phenomenology. For if phenomenology is a science of pure essences and formulates scientific laws about such essences, there has to be something like a method to follow in order to discover and test such eidetic truths; and this method is dubbed as eidetic variation. Now, a crucial aspect of this method has not been under active consideration yet: namely, as Husserl stresses in Experience and Judgment, that the eidetic variation is somehow to be related to the Greek notion of “hen epi pollôn”: the one over the many. An expression first used by Aristotle in the context of his dispute with Plato on the status of intelligible objects as universals. Accordingly, it seems clear that, by using this expression, Husserl wanted to refer his method to this Aristotle/Plato divide. The aim of this paper is to take this claim seriously, and to show, by an historical detour which takes into consideration this dispute, in which sense this method can be considered as a crucial contribution to the tradition to which phenomenology belongs, namely the Platonic-Aristotelian tradition.","PeriodicalId":42801,"journal":{"name":"Studia Phaenomenologica","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hen epi pollon. The Origin of Husserl’s Eidetic Variation and the Divide Between Plato and Aristotle on the Universal\",\"authors\":\"A. Djian\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/studphaen2020206\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is commonly known that Husserl’s eidetic variation is of paramount importance for phenomenology. For if phenomenology is a science of pure essences and formulates scientific laws about such essences, there has to be something like a method to follow in order to discover and test such eidetic truths; and this method is dubbed as eidetic variation. Now, a crucial aspect of this method has not been under active consideration yet: namely, as Husserl stresses in Experience and Judgment, that the eidetic variation is somehow to be related to the Greek notion of “hen epi pollôn”: the one over the many. An expression first used by Aristotle in the context of his dispute with Plato on the status of intelligible objects as universals. Accordingly, it seems clear that, by using this expression, Husserl wanted to refer his method to this Aristotle/Plato divide. The aim of this paper is to take this claim seriously, and to show, by an historical detour which takes into consideration this dispute, in which sense this method can be considered as a crucial contribution to the tradition to which phenomenology belongs, namely the Platonic-Aristotelian tradition.\",\"PeriodicalId\":42801,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studia Phaenomenologica\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studia Phaenomenologica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/studphaen2020206\",\"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":"Studia Phaenomenologica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/studphaen2020206","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: 2

摘要

众所周知,胡塞尔的特征变异理论对现象学具有极其重要的意义。因为,如果现象学是一门关于纯粹本质的科学,并且制定了关于这些本质的科学规律,那么,为了发现和检验这些真理,就必须有一种方法可以遵循;这种方法被称为特征变异。现在,这种方法的一个关键方面还没有得到积极的考虑:即,正如胡塞尔在《经验与判断》中所强调的那样,特征变异在某种程度上与希腊的“hen epi pollôn”概念有关:即一高于众。亚里士多德在他与柏拉图关于可理解对象作为共相的地位的争论中首次使用的一个表达。因此,似乎很明显,胡塞尔通过使用这个表达,想要将他的方法与亚里士多德/柏拉图的划分联系起来。本文的目的是认真对待这一主张,并通过考虑到这一争议的历史迂回,在某种意义上,这种方法可以被认为是对现象学所属的传统,即柏拉图-亚里士多德传统的重要贡献。
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
Hen epi pollon. The Origin of Husserl’s Eidetic Variation and the Divide Between Plato and Aristotle on the Universal
It is commonly known that Husserl’s eidetic variation is of paramount importance for phenomenology. For if phenomenology is a science of pure essences and formulates scientific laws about such essences, there has to be something like a method to follow in order to discover and test such eidetic truths; and this method is dubbed as eidetic variation. Now, a crucial aspect of this method has not been under active consideration yet: namely, as Husserl stresses in Experience and Judgment, that the eidetic variation is somehow to be related to the Greek notion of “hen epi pollôn”: the one over the many. An expression first used by Aristotle in the context of his dispute with Plato on the status of intelligible objects as universals. Accordingly, it seems clear that, by using this expression, Husserl wanted to refer his method to this Aristotle/Plato divide. The aim of this paper is to take this claim seriously, and to show, by an historical detour which takes into consideration this dispute, in which sense this method can be considered as a crucial contribution to the tradition to which phenomenology belongs, namely the Platonic-Aristotelian tradition.
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
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Husserl’s Phenomenology Transcendental Phenomenology as Human Possibility The Icon as Revelation Cassirer und Husserl The Image of Impossibility Binding Literature and Phenomenology
×
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