Husserl's Phenomenology: Method of Philosophizing

Рет қаралды 162,736

Күн бұрын

This video discusses the key concepts of Husserl’s phenomenology as a method of philosophizing. This focuses however on Husserl’s notion of phenomenology as a method of philosophizing.
Full transcript of this video is available at: philonotes.com/2022/05/edmund...
*****
See also:
WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY?
Transcript Link: philonotes.com/2022/05/philos...
KZfaq Link: • What is Philosophy? Me...
ORIGIN OF PHILOSOPHY
Transcript Link: philonotes.com/2022/05/origin...
KZfaq Link: • The Origin of Philosop...
HISTORY OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY (PART 1)
Transcript Link: philonotes.com/2022/05/histor...
KZfaq Link: • Thales to Anaxagoras: ...
HISTORY OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY (PART 2)
Transcript Link: philonotes.com/2022/05/histor...
KZfaq Link: • Socrates, Plato, Arist...
HISTORY OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY (PART 3)
Transcript Link: philonotes.com/2022/05/histor...
KZfaq Link: • Stoicism, Epicureanism...
HISTORY OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY (PART 4)
Transcript Link: philonotes.com/2022/05/histor...
KZfaq Link: • Plotinus to Jesus Chri...
DOING PHILOSOPHY
Transcript Link:
KZfaq Link: • Doing Philosophy
SOCRATIC METHOD OF PHILOSOPHIZING
Transcript Link:
KZfaq Link: • Socratic Method of Phi...
HUSSERL’S PHENOMENOLOGY: METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING
Transcript Link: philonotes.com/2022/05/edmund...
KZfaq Link: • Husserl's Phenomenolog...
THE HUMAN PERSON AS AN EMBODIED SPIRIT
Transcript Link: philonotes.com/2022/05/the-hu...
KZfaq Link: • The Human Person as an...
*****
For more discussions about Philosophy, VISIT OUR WEBSITE: philonotes.com/
To get updates from PHILO-notes, FOLLOW US on Facebook: / philonotes.jeff
OR, to get notifications from PHILO-notes Daily Whiteboard, SUBSCRIBE NOW! / @philonotes
Feel free to share your thoughts in the “comments” section below.
Thanks!
PHILO-notes

Пікірлер: 263

@yuutkenkatoa7765 3 жыл бұрын

That is the clearest explanation to Husserl's Phenomenology ever. Thanks for the video. It helped me a lot to get the point.

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

many thanks for your sweet and very inspiring comments, yuut. best wishes!

@etcetera3282 2 жыл бұрын

Very interesting and you're excellent at explaining this not so easy concepts. I don't think I can stop watching your videos from now on, time not forbidding. Thank you so much for putting all the energy and time in.

@PHILOnotes 2 жыл бұрын

Awesome! Happy to hear that! Thanks

@zacd798 6 жыл бұрын

Thank you for this introduction! Tackling Husserl's work is so full of jargon, it helps to get a key points based video!

@PHILOnotes 6 жыл бұрын

No worries, Zac. Thanks too for your kind words. You really did inspire us more. All the best!

@yahyawikov 6 жыл бұрын

The best introduction I've seen to the husserl's phenomenology. Thanks a lot and continue

@PHILOnotes 6 жыл бұрын

Hi Abderrahim! Many thanks for your very generous comments. We are truly inspired to continue working on this project. Please note that a video on Martin Heidegger's existential philosophy is in the pipeline. Thanks again and best wishes!

@lyrical9582 4 жыл бұрын

@@PHILOnotes any links to Heidegger ?? Thanks in advance 😊

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

@@lyrical9582 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/otdhi8p5ssvYhX0.html

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

@@lyrical9582 here's the full transcript: philonotes.com/index.php/2017/11/25/heidegger/

@lyrical9582 4 жыл бұрын

@@PHILOnotes thank you dear 😍

@paulcallahan3897 2 жыл бұрын

What a superbly clean, wonderfully articulated discourse. Thank you

@can.I.dothis 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much ! I fastened the speed of talk and it's a great and thorough overview !

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much for your very inspiring comments, Nelle. Best wishes!

@shaibaldas8493 4 жыл бұрын

A great and comprehensible introduction to Husserl. Thank you. Looking for more

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

Thanks too, Shaibal.

@BizRasam 4 жыл бұрын

This breakdown is insane and I thank you for it.

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

no worries, Biz Rasam!

@sraadam2323 4 жыл бұрын

hands down the best explanation I have found, thank you very much.

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

thank you so much for your very inspiring comment, SRa Adam. best wishes!

@khalida613 4 жыл бұрын

The best simplified explanation I have seen so far. Thank you so much

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

Thanks me me. Glad it was helpful!

@oswaldpaulbartiana2245 4 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much for making this easy it really helped me in making my report about this. Keep up the good work and may God bless you always 😊

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

No worries, Oswald. We wish you all the best. Cheers!

@1995yuda 2 жыл бұрын

This is a PHENOMENAL explanation! Thank you!!

@PHILOnotes 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much, mate!

@srbernadettelutaaya1641 Жыл бұрын

thank you philo notes, this explanation is so superb. i had never understood phenomenology until today

@shayrho3289 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you, you made his philosophy so clear!

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

You are most welcome, Shanae. Best wishes!

@nilanjanaghosh3432 5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for making it comprehensible.

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

thanks too, Nilanjan Ghosh, for your generous comments. cheers!

@minalamo1766 5 жыл бұрын

The back ground music makes me sleepy while watching this video.

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

thanks Mina Lamo for the feedback. But please note that we already removed the music in our other videos. Best wishes!

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

@Arunandi hmmmm....yeah

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

@Arunandi ok ok ☺

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

@Arunandi Many thanks, Arunandi, for your very inspiring comments!

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

@Arunandi what do you mean?

@ADLocke 4 жыл бұрын

Clear, concise and consistent. Good Job!

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

thank you for your very inspiring comments, A.D. Locke. cheers!

@MrPipvampire 3 жыл бұрын

I just love this. Thank you so much. What an eye-opener. Why didn't I know this?????????? it's so obvious when it's revealed.

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

We are super inspired by your very positive comments, Leslie. We wish you all the best!

@alirezasabetpour7025 5 жыл бұрын

I am a doctor... The best sets of video of philosophy

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

Many thanks, Alireza, for your very generous comments. You inspire us to work hard! Best wishes!

@Gvcp117 4 жыл бұрын

Thank you very much for this video! These are hard concepts to grasp, but you made a great job making it clear!

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

Many thanks Paolo for your generous comment! Best wishes!

@raphaelessien3538 Жыл бұрын

Thanking you immensely for this clear and indepth explaination. God bless you. you are the best

@akashm8307 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much for the elaboration. Its really helpful to grasp the core ideas of phenomenology.

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

you're welcome, Akash. cheers!

@tngo4042 5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the detailed explanation...it is quite confusing at first but it registers once you pay attention....

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

Glad to hear you find our video helpful. Thanks too, T Ngo23. Your generous comments really inspired us! Best wishes!

@libinandrews 3 жыл бұрын

I watched many videos on KZfaq on Phenomenology but none of them explicates the Transcendental Phenomenology of Husserl in depth. It's a great work you did. Thank you!

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much, Libin, for your very inspiring comments. Cheers!

@Jalfaruki 2 жыл бұрын

This incredibly an effective lecture. As a teacher of sociology for long I benefited a lot from this and I request you to do more video related to phenomenological sociology. Thanks a lot again

@PHILOnotes 2 жыл бұрын

We're glad to hear we could be of help. We still have plenty of topics in the pipeline, but we'll make sure to do more on phenomenological sociology. Thank you!

@soo3827 3 жыл бұрын

this is very helpful, thank you so much for making this video!

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

No worries, soo. Glad it helps. Best wishes!

@orchinary5083 4 жыл бұрын

You made it so simple. Thank you.

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

Thank you very much, Yahya Ghazali! It is really our purpose to provide simplified learning materials and resources and make the learning in philosophy incredibly easy! So, we're so glad to hear your feedback. :)

@origaminoh8995 5 жыл бұрын

Thank You ! I love it .

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

No worries, Origami Noh. We are glad you find our videos helpful. We wish you all the best!

@veiled33 4 жыл бұрын

Excellent video capturing the nuance and complexity of Husserl's thought and methodology while also presenting it in an accessible manner. This is a very fine difficult task!

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

thanks Chris Pierce for your very inspiring comments. best wishes!

@sairamolleda1410 2 жыл бұрын

It really helps me to understand what is the differences of realism and idealism.

@AnjuTMakin 4 жыл бұрын

wonderfully concise and detailed at the same time!

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

Thanks heaps for your generous comments, Anju. Cheers!

@markfabian2582 5 жыл бұрын

Well done . Please keep it !

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

Thanks heaps, Mark. Cheers!

@alohagraceramirezreforsado4104 Жыл бұрын

This is very helpful, thank you so much

@Jbwibo 6 жыл бұрын

This is a huge huge aha moment for me. It is brilliant! The tone of voice is just right, technical words are introduced by their 'character' before being used so that they do not destruct the flow of the delivery of knowledge. That way they do not sound heavy to the mind. It is an aha moment because it appears we can never really exhaust how concepts can be explained. I was contrasting this method with a video of someone reading the transcript or a video of some in front of a class.

@PHILOnotes 6 жыл бұрын

Hi Julius, thank you so much for your very generous review. We deeply appreciate it. We wish you all the best!

@enoswafula111 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for that great inside....God bless...

@PHILOnotes 2 жыл бұрын

No worries, mate!

@hereticaljake740 11 ай бұрын

Great video! Just wanted to add a quick note: Descartes ends the meditations by finalizing his thinking to, "Cogito, Sum" = "I think, I am". After receiving criticism from Mary Shepard, he removes the "Ergo" as the presupposition presented problems for Shepard.

@allangallego3244 9 ай бұрын

Been watching your videos on methods of philosophizing... the other of the same content is the Socratic method of philosophizing. After seeing these videos I realize that there is no absolute method of philosophizing. I mean I can make my own method of philosophizing such as the method of philosophizing by Plato's theory of Forms. Thanks for sharing this video. I always prefer to see your videos whenever I search for philosophical topics in my subjects. As a teacher of philosophy, these help me a lot. God bless!

@fegeneralao5964 Жыл бұрын

Great information video...

@agnaldonhangumele6010 2 жыл бұрын

wow. this was amazing explanation

@ashleyjiae.2280 2 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much, I was assigned to read many many materials and dont understand at all... but your video helps!

@PHILOnotes 2 жыл бұрын

Happy to hear that! You're very welcome!

@PracticalWisdomPhilosophyDS 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks for your information 🌼🙏

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks a lot too!

@Worshipsatch 4 жыл бұрын

Really liked your explanation... Thanks 😊

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

Thanks too, Worshipsatch!

@g.1260 2 жыл бұрын

Awesome! Thank you!

@PHILOnotes 2 жыл бұрын

thank you so much, mate!

@didinsyafruddin49 Жыл бұрын

This video does make philosophy accessible👍

@erikaburlagdan6558 Жыл бұрын

Thanks for that video

@solomonekpo1151 4 жыл бұрын

Thanks so much for your clarity. Besides, your tone of voice is so calming and relaxing as to make the mind more attentive and receptive. It's a real pleasure to listen to you!

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

Thanks too, Solomon, for your very inspiring comments. I wish you all the best!

@gincotree 4 жыл бұрын

Thank you. It is very helpfull.

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

No worries, Chong Chin KIm. We are glad you found our videos helpful. All the best!

@inthemomenttomoment 2 жыл бұрын

Without doubt, in true Faith, it is more like, I AM, therefore I think that I AM. I am Reason that resonates with all others who resonate with the One Truth! LOVE=mc2 accepts TRUTH!

@deeppurrple 4 жыл бұрын

Someone limited understand philosophy wanted to know phenomenology had his 'aha' movement watching this video. After watching 100s of video this is Best.

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much for your very inspiring comment, Deep Purple. Best wishes!

@janfrancesaviles8582 3 жыл бұрын

Your videos are really great! Always been checking your channel for a lighter and more condensed explanation. May I know your primary sources because they really are a MUST for papers.🥺💖

@janfrancesaviles8582 3 жыл бұрын

oh! saw them just now iin your site. I already subscribed for the newsletter. Thank you for these!😁

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much for your very inspiring comments, Jan Frances. Best wishes!

@passivemoon 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you.

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

no worries, passivemoon! cheers!

@jericocortes7289 3 жыл бұрын

Isang Thank You para kay Sir Wilbert!

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

yeah...

@Munjoykhimhun 5 жыл бұрын

Interested people may answer. What if the consciousness is not experiencing any object or thought, rather just experiencing itself? Now here in such experience there would be no perception, but only pure consciousness conscious of nothing and just being conscious. consciousness not flowing outward but inward. What would have Husserl said about that kind of consciousness?

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

"reflexive thinking" or "self-consciousness" (that is, the moment intentionality is directed towards one's own state of mind". thanks Munjoy Khimhun for this insightful comment. cheers!

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

"reflexive thinking" is also Berkeley's answer to the question as to who (if esse est percipi) would perceive the mind for it to exist.

@steviewax 4 жыл бұрын

Pure consciousness only exists in god who is the source. For humans, consciousness is reflected in the fears, dreams and desires from experienced life. The religiously or mystically minded may get glimpses of pure consciousnes..

@sadegaldolaim3143 4 жыл бұрын

@carolinevonarnim4451 3 жыл бұрын

Perhaps he would say: As long as the consciesness is given a body, there is no escape from flowing out to it and go to the t-deoartmen sometime.

@paulmetdebbie447 2 жыл бұрын

Great video. It made very clear for me what Husserl meant, and also where he failed compared to advaita vedanta.

@rodcr3392 3 жыл бұрын

Thank you for this, it helped me a lot!! But I got very confused after 19:10: the questions made just before proved that it would still be a table EVEN if it had none os the 5 features previously asked. There are tables with more or less than 4 legs, and they're still tables. There are tables not made of wood, and they're still tables, etc. So the answer to WHAT IS A TABLE?, at 19:30, looks like a natural atitude answer, rather then a phenomenological one...! Where did I failed to understand?

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

I think the proper term is not "natural attitude", but "intentionality". For Husserl, intentionality is a characteristic of consciousness whereby it is conscious of something, that is, that consciousness is directed towards an object (table in this case).

@josephzirk6523 Жыл бұрын

@@PHILOnotes it appears to me that these problems have been discussed thoroughly by a lot of people, such as Plato in his discussion of the concept of circle and the circular shapes that people draw in real world.

@maryannilagan2265 11 ай бұрын

Thank You

@Acerbic_Enigma 2 жыл бұрын

This is a nice video. Really helped me a lot in my studies! May I know the resources (books) for this video?

@EvaAhimsa 6 жыл бұрын

Thanks so much! would you consider doing a video on heidegger? i'm totally lost

@PHILOnotes 6 жыл бұрын

Hi Eva! Here's the link to our video on the key concepts of Heidegger's existential philosophy. We hope this helps! kzfaq.info/get/bejne/otdhi8p5ssvYhX0.html

@EvaAhimsa 6 жыл бұрын

Thank you! I was looking for a video on him but didn't find it immediately

@PHILOnotes 6 жыл бұрын

You're welcome, Eva!

@aion5837 5 жыл бұрын

I thought that Heidegger said that he wasn't an existentialist.@@PHILOnotes

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

Yes, the Sartrean model of existentialism. thus, Heidegger, including Jaspers, preferred to use the word "existential philosophy" than Sartre's "existentialism"

@pbasswil 5 жыл бұрын

Husserl is a Germanic name, so you wouldn't sound it out as if reading English. Huss is like puss(ycat). erl is like Errol (Flynn) - if you slur Errol almost into one syllable. Or to rhyme with the way a posh Brit might say 'girl': gehl_ Btw, I don't mean to criticize the way the narrator is speaking - she's doing a _fantastic_ job, speaking a second language.

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

many thanks for the constructive criticism, pbasswil. we will try to study more, especially on pronunciation. best wishes!

@nkotanyijclaude6770 5 жыл бұрын

Très intéressant.

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

Je vous remercie

@John-lf3xf 4 жыл бұрын

It seems to be a splicing between Kantian transcendental reasoning and Hegelian materialistic dialectical analysis

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

yeah. thanks

@TheAbsurd_Man 5 жыл бұрын

Please make more lectures on regular basis

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

Hi Jedi. I was away from my desk for a month. But thanks for the reminder. I am now back. I will start posting more lectures next week. Thanks again. Cheers!

@bradspitt3896 4 жыл бұрын

So when you talk about the definitions of "knowledge," which I believe the Epistomological definition is synonymous with "Certainty," the phenomenalogical definition is not that. The phenomenological definition of "knowledge" is an equivocal definition and is always bracketed? Meaning it's not concerned with certainty or even Epistomology in general. Is that accurate?

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

definitions are always normative. from the very beginning things didn't have names. and then people begin to define, that is, to set the limits of something (Latin: definire) to avoid confusion. after people set the limits of something, they agreed to call that thing, that thing. that's how we come up with a "definition" of something. hence, definition is not synonymous with certainty. we only become certain about something because we agreed to call that something, that something. for example, a table didn't have a name from the beginning. when we define a table, we set the limits of that table. for example, we may say a table has four legs, made up of wood, has a flat surface, and is used primarily for dining or putting things on it. after we describe that table, we agree (hence, normative) that anything that possesses those characteristics is a table. that's how we become certain about our understanding of a table. it's certain because everybody agrees; hence, the objectivity of our understanding of the table. now, the process of coming up with a "precise" understanding (thus, certainty) of something (the table in our example) is the business of Husserlian phenomenology. i hope this helps.

@lyrical9582 4 жыл бұрын

Hi. Great video. Any videos on phenomenological method ???

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

thanks Lyrical. sure, will make more

@teachersgaming7026 5 жыл бұрын

Do you have a report about "the human person as an embodied spirit"?

@PHILOnotes 5 жыл бұрын

hi Yuan, we are still in the process of making it.

@paulmetdebbie447 2 жыл бұрын

Phenomenology in its description of experiences relies completely on personal language, which is conditioned by the mind and therefor limited and distorted. . It can never reach reality, only the illusory mind made version of reality. Going beyond the mind as in Advaita Vedanta however, can. This gives an account of the stillness between the product of the mind (words, feelings, sensation, images). This is the fundamental difference between the two, and between experience and realization.

@inthemomenttomoment 2 жыл бұрын

The other (phenomenona) expects more than IT'S will can give. It takes perception that's supernal to really understand things as they appear to us that are more or less than US.

@khevinliza5427 3 жыл бұрын

Thankyou maam

@PHILOnotes 2 жыл бұрын

No worries, mate

@nenu-nenu 2 жыл бұрын

寝る前に聞きながら寝てます

@TheKinix13 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

You're welcome, Kinix!

@youtubeweb3009 3 жыл бұрын

hello can you please elaborate the difference between natural attitude and phenomenological attitude thank you!

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

natural attitude is just our unreflective attitude. we are aware of things, but we are not conscious. phenomenological attitude, on the other hand, is when you are reflective. you are aware and at the same time conscious. here question things. i hope this helps.

@ronaldpoyntz6394 2 жыл бұрын

We have bought several books on the topic but this is far and away my favorite intro to Husserl's Phenomenology. We would LOVE to acquire these visual diagrams of the explanations. Any suggestions? .

@drfaustens4504 3 жыл бұрын

How does Descartes' "cogito" differ from Parmenides' "to think and to be are one in the same"?

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

I haven't thoroughly studied Parmenides. Hence, I cannot give a substantial answer to the questions. Thanks for the question though.

@philosophyhonsramanujanclg594 3 жыл бұрын

It was good But please make video on ponty's phenomenology of perception , asap.

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks, but we cannot make a video lecture asap on Merleau-Ponty's phenomenology of perception because we have a long list of topics in the pipeline, and in the first place, we still have to research and write a draft on this topic.

@sodiqshitta7078 Жыл бұрын

I can't find the transcript again

@paulmetdebbie447 2 жыл бұрын

Advaita vedanta makes us discover that, more than Husserl imagined, consciousness even needs no doing or intention. Choiceless Awareness is not directed, not intentional and it is no doing, it is the essence of the Daoist principaal of Wu Wei, complying to the natural flow. This indeed has to do with intuition, but it has no purpose, agenda or object as it focus. It is unfocussed Awareness of the one subject, Oneness. It is more like the Dasein of Heidegger, but even more abstract.

@aprilcasiro2287 Жыл бұрын

💗💗💗💗

@shepherdchikohora8974 4 жыл бұрын

A POWERFULL

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

thanks Shepherd Chikohora. cheers!

@rodrigogil8643 Жыл бұрын

I like the music. It helps (but I can my own music on background, so it's ok if you take them out)

@justinecostillas8987 3 жыл бұрын

In what sense does phenomenology help build a fair and humane society?

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

This requires another long write-up, Justine. Can't do it this time. We have so many articles in the pipeline.

@inthemomenttomoment 2 жыл бұрын

Super Conscious is more like an Absolute, resonanting, residential, royal complex that needs no referential object &/or is The Supreme Object, over any Other Conscieness that needs an object to refer to.

@snowwhite4367 3 жыл бұрын

At about the epoché or something, what i understood is basically "emptying your cup" Is that right? Or nah? This is still hard for me. Sorry and thank yoy

@snowwhite4367 3 жыл бұрын

One more thing, i did not understand the talk about consciousness and stuff. Lile when you compared descartes and husserl in the start of the video

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

Yeah, like emptying a cup, that is, freeing your mind from biases.

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

In Descartes, the Cogito (that is, the "I") determines reality or a specific thing. Husserl begins with that. Like Descartes, Husserl believes that the I is always conscious of "something". I hope this helps, Snow White.

@snowwhite4367 3 жыл бұрын

@@PHILOnotes OH MY GODD YOU REPLIED! THANK YOU SO MUCH! Uhmm imma take advantage of this and ask more questions. I am also confused between phenomenogy and existentialism, aren't they the same in finding essence of something? and another thing, in my book there is a concept of existential phenemenology and i can't seem to find any videos explaining that.

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

@@snowwhite4367 no worries, Snow White. First, please note that both phenomenology and existentialism take different forms. Thus, for example, the phenomenological model of Husserl is different from that of Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and the existentialism of Heidegger is different from Sartre's. However, there is a common ground between and among phenomenological approaches, that is, the study of phenomenon. In existentialism, the common ground is the study or the attempt to understand the meaning of life. So, at the end of the day, phenomenology and existentialism are not the same. Again, phenomenology focuses more on "things", that is, phenomena, while existentialism focuses on "human" life. But since phenomenology is understood in general as a study of phenomena, then when it studies life or the "meaning of life", to be specific, then we may call it as "existential phenomenology". I hope this helps, Snow White. Best wishes!

@advisorywarning 5 жыл бұрын

Does anyone know what accent this is?!?! It driving me insane. PLEASE let me know!!

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

just any English out there!

@sossupummi 3 жыл бұрын

my sensors indicate a tad hint of Finnish :)

@cube2fox 3 жыл бұрын

Small side note: In this video the name gets pronounced something like "Husserel", but it should really be pronounced like "Husserl", i.e. without adding an "e" after the "r". In IPA its [ˈhʊsɐl].

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

Many thanks for your constructive critique, Trurl. Cheers!

@edthoreum7625 2 жыл бұрын

5:45 the given [no preconceptions/speculation] 14:14 eidectic reduction=[trans/phen0] -facts -essence /possibilities[hope,,,]

@angelicavasquez8850 Жыл бұрын

💞💞💞 Joy Cerujales

@Mikaeljuni1214 Жыл бұрын

I love you 💖💖

@georgevavolil7005 4 жыл бұрын

Speed *1.25

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

i see. thanks.

@a.r.rajeevramakrishnan8197 3 жыл бұрын

The powers of wisdom are endless :all of them under two divisions The' same 'and the' other ' could coclusively be brought mearging in to that form which makes for "other sameness" To clarity of vision one should awake The power of knowledge is endless ; the end of all this can be marked as "sameness" and "the other " thus in this way ,there are two divisions;in this ,merging the other with sameness , one should remain awake to that clear state of being by NARAYANA GURU

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

Thanks...

@nathanjudemartinez9281 Жыл бұрын

I am very confused

@virabadrasana 3 жыл бұрын

What is a table? Dinner is served!

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

Yeah, then let's eat. Thanks Jean-Pierre Fouche! Cheers!

@naikimran7411 Жыл бұрын

Please do not add background music in video

@rawitdawitmakamandag8624 4 жыл бұрын

Sartre is pronounced as "Sart" only

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

Thanks Papi Chess for your comments. But I think the Asians mispronounced the term. My PhD dissertation supervisor who is French and was once a professor of Sorbonne pronounced it as "Sar-tre".

@magik8566 4 жыл бұрын

@@PHILOnotes the last syllable falls off with the "e" being barely pronounced if at all... SarTRRRRe...(except in Southern France, of course, where they pronounce last syllables!). Good dissertation BTW.

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

@@magik8566 oh, thank you Magik for the brilliant thoughts. now we know. cheers!

@athenadominiqueruam3239 4 жыл бұрын

you sound like selena gomez gosh

@PHILOnotes 4 жыл бұрын

Thank you! :)

@JavierBonillaC 3 жыл бұрын

17:00 the first example. No “moral of the story” in this example though. Does not conclude.

@PHILOnotes 2 жыл бұрын

@profeluisegarcia 2 жыл бұрын

MINUTE 19: What a big discovery¡¡...After that long exposition phenomelogists discover the warm water: that a good dictionary is enough to get ride of that so much silly phe-no-me-no-lo-gi-cal wordiness¡

@PHILOnotes 2 жыл бұрын

hmmmm...yeah

@DaveWasley 6 жыл бұрын

Where's the aha! moment of intuition (at 19:58)? This has been great so far, but the conclusions you reach don't follow from your premises regarding the eidetic reduction of "table." Is it still a table if it has less than four legs? Yes. Is it still a table if it isn't made of wood? Well, I'm writing this on an iPad on a metal table, so it would still be a table. Is it still a table if it doesn't have a flat surface? Sure, plenty of tables don't have flat surfaces. Is it still a table if were a shape other than a rectangle? No, all tables must be rectangular. Circular tables aren't tables. I use my tables primarily for decoration, so they must not be tables...see what I mean? These are all more like accidental properties of the table, and say nothing of the essence of tableness. Wouldn't it be better to ask something to the extent of, "What about this table constitutes it as a table and not as a fish?" I don't know where to go from here though, because my answer would be some variation of Platonism, empiricism, or a combination of both: I've got the notion of what a table is "in me" which is there either naturally as a form, or intuited by collating the experiences I've had (probably the latter), but it's not necessarily something I can give a positive qualification to. It probably comes down to the structuralist explanation: my understanding of what a table is is socially constituted, and involves not an understanding of what a table is, but an intuition of all the things that the table is not.

@PHILOnotes 6 жыл бұрын

The clear understanding of what something is made up of and its main function. Simple as that. However, I understand that you are not engaging my articulation of Husserl's pure phenomenology, but Husserl himself. I don't need to engage you further. I'm not Husserlian in the first place. Thanks though for your comments.

@williambunter3311 6 жыл бұрын

How about the further suggestion, Diamondback, that a table is known as such by its being USED as a table, regardless of its material accidentals such as shape, weight, colour etc.? One could add a sub-definition by saying something that is CUSTOMARILY so-used. For instance, you might rest some paperwork on a chair and use it for support while you write. So to all intents and purposes it is serving as a table. Probably, however, you would still refer to it as a chair, because that would be its usual function.

@venusmungesa26 5 жыл бұрын

pornography

@blessingojembe9834 5 жыл бұрын

That simply shows that the experiences people go through in life, do not make them less a man. So Yes! It is still a table no matter the functional limitations or the design. After all, that is why we are all differently created, but yet, we are all still man.

@Worshipsatch 4 жыл бұрын

I suppose eidectic reduction is subjective in first place, what you demonstrated in your query, is your own eidectic reduction, might be different for different people , the common factor is acknowledgement of these self-made premises.i suppose...

@clintonlunn4357 3 жыл бұрын

Too many ads for me to get through.

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

yeah, but KZfaq set all those ads. Just skip them. also, please note that it's the ads the keep us going.

@paulmetdebbie447 2 жыл бұрын

Phenomenology studies the world. Advaita vedanta studies reality beyond the world. It could be called nomenology.

@alpaslanertungealp9563 3 жыл бұрын

Putting aside the pros of this video here are some constructive criticisms: 1. Please do not use background music. That is numbing. Philosophy does not require any ambience at all. 2. Please make the speech a bit faster. Do not worry, those shoe watch these videos can follow difficult thought chains easily. 3. The use of the term “transcendental” in this video necessitates the explanation of its origin, i.e. Immanuel Kant’s transcendental idealism, which would necessitate a long video in itself. Your usage of this term in this video is flawed. It is not the first time I come across with the misconception and misunderstanding of the term. Most of the anglophone philosophers, use it with a meaning which is alien to its origin. The misunderstanding follows from a linguistic habit. Transcendental cannot b derived from the word transcendent, but in German it is an Etruscan linguistic heritage coming through Latin into German. The word did not exist until Kant, it was created by him, the meaning of which does not just leap in the direction of transcendence but it is reflected back. Thus it does not point to a “realm” beyond something but it points back to the self, to the mind. The knower is here, the subject did not transcend. Kant’s philosophy is not about something which transcends, on the contrary. Thus the usage of the word in this video is wrong. From which follows the misunderstanding of Husserl’s philosophy.

@PHILOnotes 3 жыл бұрын

many thanks, Alpaslan, for your very thorough and constructive critique. points well taken. cheers!