Husserl’s extensive analyses of image consciousness (Bildbewusstsein) and of the imagination (Phantasie) offer insightful and detailed structural explications. However, despite this careful work, Husserl’s discussions fail to overcome the need to rely on a most problematic concept: mental images. The epistemological conundrums triggered by the conceptual framework of mental images are well known—we have only to remember the questions regarding knowledge acquisition that plagued British empiricism. Beyond these problems, however, a plethora of important questions arise from claiming that mental images (...) are structural moments of imaging and imagining. Any attempt to clarify the structure and conditions for the possibility of aesthetic experience must first provide an unambiguous account of pictorial depiction—a task unattainable through the mental images discourse. Similarly, exposing the import of the imagination for theoretical scientific inquiries (be they positive or eidetic) requires an initial explication of the structure of this consciousness; this explication, however, must address our ability to imagine non-spatially determined objects—something the conceptual framework of mental images utterly fails to accomplish. In this paper I argue against Husserl’s reliance on mental images in his phenomenological analyses of imaging and imagining and propose an alternative structural account for both. This account is free of this reliance and able to steer clear of its insidious implications for epistemology, aesthetics, and methodological reflections. By closely following the development of Husserl’s account I suggest alternative descriptions while building on Husserl’s important work. (shrink)

Many have deemed ineluctable the tension between Husserl’s transcendental eidetics and his Crisis method of historical reflection. In this paper, I argue that this tension is an apparent one. I contend that dissolving this tension and showing not only the possibility, but also the necessity of the successful collaboration between these two apparently irreconcilable methods guarantees the very freedom of inquiry Husserl so emphatically stressed. To make this case, I draw from Husserl’s synthetic analyses of type and concept constitution as (...) well as his later work on sedimentation and streaming-in and develop a richer modal taxonomy than the one Husserl proposed. I employ this taxonomy in an examination of the structures and conditions for the possibility of transcendental eidetic variation in order to show this method’s reliance on historically sedimented epistemic and normative resources. This reliance brings to light the necessity for a methodological critique, which is precisely what I take to be the work of teleological–historical reflection as Husserl comes to conceive it in the Crisis. (shrink)

This dissertation explores and argues for the import of the imagination (Phantasie) in Edmund Husserl's phenomenological method of inquiry. It contends that Husserl's extensive analyses of the imagination influenced how he came to conceive the phenomenological method throughout the main stages of his philosophical career. The work clarifies Husserl's complex method of investigation by considering the role of the imagination in his main methodological apparatuses: the phenomenological, eidetic, and transcendental reductions, and eidetic variation - all of which remained ambiguous despite (...) his extensive programmatic discussions. The work illuminates and clarifies aspects of the Husserlian phenomenological method never before explored. -/- In order to clarify Husserl's eidetic method of inquiry, I propose a new way of thinking about the imagination - as direct intuitive presentation (eigentliche anschauliche Vorstellung) and as horizonal-nexic level of consciousness exhibiting the neutrality, freedom, and possibility as its essential features. Following Husserl's studies of the imagination, I propose a three-level model of consciousness (realizing, imagining, and eidetic) and explore the dynamic flexibility of each level (as horizon within which acts such as judgments or memories can unfold). This model of consciousness allows for a rethinking of the sources and conditions for the possibility of eidetic phenomenological inquiry - topics Husserl was mostly silent about. -/- Through a rethinking of the model of consciousness, I propose a tight and substantial relationship between the natural (everyday) and artificial (methodological, theoretical) attitudes. I argue that the structure and systems of possibilities pertaining to the artificial attitude - i.e., our actual as well as possible methodological tools - are structurally and well as informationally bound to the structure and system of possibilities pertaining to the natural attitude. In order to explore the nature of the relationship between these two attitudes I argue that we must take a closer look at the structure and abilities of imagining consciousness - the sole nexic-horizonal level that can function both naturally and artificially. This insight regarding the nature of consciousness clarifies Husserl's transcendental idealism in its intimate connection to the everyday. Understanding Husserl's philosophical stance is thus purged of all possibility of mistakenly labeling it as entailing immanent detachment, solipsism, or Platonic idealism. (shrink)

Tradução para o português do artigo de Richard H. Popkin "Did Hume Ever Read Berkeley?", publicado em "The Journal of Philosophy". Volume LVI, número 12, 1959, pp. 535-545.

Tradução para o português do artigo de Richard H. Popkin, "So, Hume Ever Read Berkeley?", publicado originalmente em "The Journal of Philosophy". Volume LXI, número 24, 1964, pp. 773-778.

Este livro propõe uma nova maneira de olhar para a filosofia do bispo e filósofo irlandês George Berkeley (1685-1753), mais conhecido pela negação da existência da matéria e pela defesa do idealismo e de teses empiristas. O autor, Costica Bradatan, aborda o pensamento de Berkeley do ponto de vista de suas raízes e influências em vez de como ele passou a ser interpretado posteriormente. Como o título sugere, o livro constitui um retrato alternativo de Berkeley, diferente da imagem predominante formada (...) a partir de uma leitura de tendência analítica, que privilegia as suas obras da juventude, especialmente o Tratado sobre os princípios do conhecimento humano (1710) e os Três diálogos entre Hylas e Philonous (1713). Este outro retrato de Berkeley procura mostrar um filósofo que leu e escreveu livros sobre alquimia, que elaborou projetos utópicos e buscou as “ilhas felizes” e o “paraíso terrestre”. Bradatan procura mostrar que a nova atitude de Berkeley em relação ao mundo material ecoou a teologia dualista dos cátaros; que seu pensamento estava enraizado nas tradições platônicas, místicas e esotéricas; que ele via a filosofia como uma espécie de salvação e a ser praticada como um modo de vida. Bradatan retrata um Berkeley muito mais rico e realista, um pensador mais profundo e espetacular. Além de ser um estudo sobre o pensamento de Berkeley em particular, com análises das suas últimas grandes obras, Alciphron, ou o filósofo minucioso (1732) e Siris (1744), o livro é um excelente exemplo da compreensão do pensamento de um filósofo à luz da história da filosofia. Este livro é de interesse para estudiosos que trabalham em uma ampla variedade de campos do saber, desde filosofia e história das ideias até literatura comparada, estudos utópicos, estudos religiosos e medievais e teoria crítica. (shrink)

Timpul trece atât de repede când urmărești convulsiile politice ale ţărilor de la marginea Uniunii Europene. Această carte a apărut într-un moment în care conflictul dintre președintele Klaus Iohannis și Partidul Social Democrat (PSD) încă mai angaja emoţii puternice. Mulţi cetăţeni vedeau în președinte și în partidul patronat de acesta, Partidul Naţional Liberal (PNL), zenitul luptei împotriva corupţiei, iar în PSD întruchiparea corupţiei. În 2017, marile proteste în sprijinul legislaţiei penale și instituţiilor poliţienești, beneficiind de încurajarea directă a președintelui, au (...) devenit imaginea revoltei publice faţă de corupţia elitei politice naţionale, personalizată de liderii PSD în imaginarul colectiv al momentului. Intensitatea polarizării politice era atât de mare încât un compromis între președintele justiţiar și partidul „penalilor” nu putea fi măcar imaginat. Îmi amintesc manifestaţiile electorale de la Iași din cursul anului 2019, când primarul PSD al urbei, Mihai Chirica, încă își pregătea traseul către PNL. Atunci, pe 9 mai, în așteptarea vizitei președintelui (invitat la mitingul propriului partid ce urma să se desfășoare pe 11 mai), participanţii la mitingul PSD au fost întâmpinaţi de contramanifestanţi cu placarde, fluiere, huiduieli și bancnote de 1 leu ce le erau întinse ostentativ sau aruncate pe jos, ca simbol al actului de corupţie electorală la care aceștia ar fi fost dispuși să participe (Redactia Știrile ProTV, 2019). (shrink)