1. Phenomenological Results are reproducible and not incorrigible (Hua 3, 222)
2.Eidetic Analysis can have forms in Psychological and phenomenological forms.(Hua 3, 222)
3. I do not have the naive belief that by believing that a presentation of method can be worked out before we work on substantial issues, somehow you have to presuppose the knowledge of the kind of things or concepts you are going to explain and clarify.
Somehow, we use not so clear concepts to begin our philosophizing, in the process of formulating the mothod, we use this concepts. Then, as our tools get sharper, we use it to criticise the concepts we vaguely have and to produce a more powerful theory.
4. E.g., we somehow have a concept of analysis, and we use our power to analyse the phenomena of analysis. Then we get more and more insights concerning this concept, or whatsoever. Circular, yes, but necessary.
This circle is inevitable, because, insofar as we are philosophizing about the mind, we are carrying out mental performance, with a method, this method belongs to the performance of mind, and therefore some fundamental concepts which belong to the realm of the mental is unavoidable. And therefore one cannot display a proper method for the investigation of mind and knowledge without referring to the concepts one is ready to analyse.
Philosophy as a whole moves in a Zickzack Fashion. We presuppose the knowledge of the thing we are going to study, and this is no problem.
(Holistic? Yes! Neurath Boat? Gilbert Ryle and John Searle)
5.But you see, we have to start somewhere, and I think Method is a great place to start. For the following reasons:...to be continued
2.Eidetic Analysis can have forms in Psychological and phenomenological forms.(Hua 3, 222)
3. I do not have the naive belief that by believing that a presentation of method can be worked out before we work on substantial issues, somehow you have to presuppose the knowledge of the kind of things or concepts you are going to explain and clarify.
Somehow, we use not so clear concepts to begin our philosophizing, in the process of formulating the mothod, we use this concepts. Then, as our tools get sharper, we use it to criticise the concepts we vaguely have and to produce a more powerful theory.
4. E.g., we somehow have a concept of analysis, and we use our power to analyse the phenomena of analysis. Then we get more and more insights concerning this concept, or whatsoever. Circular, yes, but necessary.
This circle is inevitable, because, insofar as we are philosophizing about the mind, we are carrying out mental performance, with a method, this method belongs to the performance of mind, and therefore some fundamental concepts which belong to the realm of the mental is unavoidable. And therefore one cannot display a proper method for the investigation of mind and knowledge without referring to the concepts one is ready to analyse.
Philosophy as a whole moves in a Zickzack Fashion. We presuppose the knowledge of the thing we are going to study, and this is no problem.
(Holistic? Yes! Neurath Boat? Gilbert Ryle and John Searle)
5.But you see, we have to start somewhere, and I think Method is a great place to start. For the following reasons:...to be continued
No comments:
Post a Comment