This paper offers a more comprehensive and accurate picture of Edmund Husserl’s semiotics. I not only clarify, as many have already done, Husserl’s theory of signs from the 1901 Logical Investigations, but also examine how he transforms that element of his philosophy in the 1913/14 Revisions to the Sixth Logical Investigation. Specifically, the paper examines the evolution of two central tenets of Husserl’s semiotics. I first look at how he modifies his classification of signs. I disclose why he revised his (...) 1901 distinction between indicators and expressions, instead claiming in 1913/14 that the divisions should be drawn between indicators, signals, and categorial signs. Second, I elucidate why Husserl overturned his conclusion from the Investigations, that signs execute their signitive operations in three steps, because he recognizes that categorial signs and their meant object are experienced all at once. By exploring the transformation of these two tenets of Husserl’s semiotics, we will see that he conceived of the First Investigation only as a starting or jumping off point for future analyses of signitive experience, rather than as his final account. This analysis will further reveal novel insights about Husserl’s understanding of intersubjectivity, passivity, and temporality. (shrink)

This paper accomplishes two goals. First, the essay elucidates Husserl’s descriptions of meaning consciousness from the 1901 Logical Investigations. I examine Husserl’s observations about the three ways we can experience meaning and I discuss his conclusions about the structure of meaning intentions. Second, the paper explores how Husserl reworked that 1901 theory in his 1913/14 Revisions to the Sixth Investigation. I explore how Husserl transformed his descriptions of the three intentions involved in meaningful experience. By doing so, Husserl not only (...) recognized intersubjective communication as the condition of possibility of linguistic meaning acts, but also transformed his account of the structure of both signitive and intuitive acts. In the conclusion, I cash out this analysis, by showing how, on the basis of these new insights, Husserl reconstructs his theory of fulfillment. (shrink)

This paper accomplishes three goals. First, the essay demonstrates that Edmund Husserl’s theory of meaning consciousness from his 1901 Logical Investigations is internally inconsistent and falls apart upon closer inspection. I show that Husserl, in 1901, describes non-intuitive meaning consciousness as a direct parallel or as a ‘mirror’ of intuitive consciousness. He claims that non-intuitive meaning acts, like intuitions, have substance and represent their objects. I reveal that, by defining meaning acts in this way, Husserl cannot account for our experiences (...) of countersensical, absurd, or impossible meanings. Second, I examine how Husserl came to recognize this 1901 mistake in his 1913/14 Revisions to the Sixth Logical Investigation. I discuss how he accordingly reformulates his understanding of non-intuitive meaning acts from the ground up in those Revisions, where this also allows for him to properly account for the experience of impossible meanings. Instead of describing them as mirrors of intuitions, Husserl takes non-intuitive meaning acts to be modifications of intuitions, where they have no substance and do not represent their objects. Finally, in the conclusion to this essay, I demonstrate how this fundamental change to his understanding of meaning consciousness forced Husserl to revise other central tenets of his philosophy, such that the trajectory of his thought can only be properly understood in light of these revisions to his theory of non-intuitive meaning consciousness. (shrink)

It is well-known that Husserl denies bodily behaviour as expressive in the I. Logical Investigation but he dramatically changes his view and holds that bodily behaviour is essentially expressive in...

Resumen En este trabajo analizo la crítica del psicologismo en las Investigaciones lógicas de Husserl. Para una reconstrucción adecuada del enfoque de este autor, vinculo las ideas centrales de su argumentación contra el psicologismo que se encuentran en el primer volumen con algunos análisis y tesis que introduce en el segundo volumen. Si bien no se presentan de manera explícita como críticas del psicologismo, estos análisis y tesis implican contribuciones para la superación de un enfoque empirista radical, vinculado en forma (...) estrecha con el subjetivismo y el psicologismo. Pongo atención especial en la crítica de las teorías de la abstracción en la Investigación Segunda, cuya vinculación con la crítica del psicologismo no suele reconocerse lo suficiente. También analizo el concepto de posibilidad ideal, fundamental para la comprensión del concepto husserliano de especie.In this paper I analyse the critique of psychologism advanced by Husserl in his Logical Investigations. In order to adequately rebuild the author's approach, I will link the central points of the argument against psychologism developed in the first volume with some analyses and theses introduced by Husserl in the second volume. These analyses and theses, although not explicitly presented as criticisms of psychologism, are clear contributions to overcoming a radical empiricist approach, closely linked to subjectivism and psychologism. I pay special attention to the critique of the theories of abstraction carried out in the Second Investigation, whose link with the critique of psychologism is not properly recognized. I also analyze the concept of ideal possibility, which is fundamental for the understanding of the Husserlian concept of species. (shrink)