Advertisement

Husserl Studies

, Volume 35, Issue 2, pp 131–148 | Cite as

The Practical Reformer: On Husserl’s Socrates

  • Daniele De SantisEmail author
Article

Abstract

The present essay offers a first, systematic reconstruction of Husserl’s understanding of Socrates’ philosophical position in the Ideengeschichte with a special focus on the Socratic method. Our goal is twofold. On the one hand, we aim to provide a clear presentation of the way in which Husserl himself conceives of the “beginning” of Western philosophy by tackling the specifically Socratic contribution to it. On the other hand, we will clarify in what sense, and to what extent, the assessment of Husserl’s Socrates helps shed some light upon the properly Husserlian conception of philosophy, notably, his twofold notion of “rationality.”

Notes

Acknowledgements

A first version of this paper was presented at the 2018 meeting of the Husserl Circle in Mexico City and was awarded the CARP Directors’ Memorial Prize in Honor of José Huertas-Jourda. I would like to thank the organizers of the conference and, in particular, the participants in the panel on phenomenology and ancient Greek philosophy (B. Hopkins, C. Majolino, I. Quepons). A second, revised, version was discussed at the Research Seminar in Phenomenology at the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Charles University, Prague. I am grateful to J. Čapek and O. Švec for organizing the seminar, and to F. Rut and M. Summa for their comments and suggestions. Finally, a special thanks goes to Ada Bronowski for improving my English. This work was supported by the European Regional Development Fund-Project “Creativity and Adaptability as Conditions of the Success of Europe in an Interrelated World” (No. CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_019/0000734).

References

  1. Bonazzi, M. (Ed.). (2016). Storia della filosofia antica. I. Dalle origini a Socrate. Roma: Carocci.Google Scholar
  2. De Santis, D. (2011). Phenomenological kaleidoscope: Remarks on the Husserlian method of eidetic variation. In The New Yearbook for Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy, XI, pp. 17–42.Google Scholar
  3. De Santis, D. (2018). Le conclusioni della filosofia del conoscere. Appunti sul programma “razionalista” di Husserl e Bontadini. Bolletino Filosofico, 33, 185–207.Google Scholar
  4. De Santis, D. (2019). “Das Wunder hier ist die Rationalität.” Remarks on Husserl on Kant’s Einbildungskraft and the idea of transcendental philosophy. (With a Note on Kurd Laßwitz). The New Yearbook for phenomenology and phenomenological philosophy, XVIII, pp. 268–287.Google Scholar
  5. Dorion, L.-A. (2004). Socrate. Paris: PUF.Google Scholar
  6. Gompez, T. (1999). Griechische Denker. Eine Geschichte der antiken Philosophie. Drei Bände. Frankfurt a. M: Eichborn.Google Scholar
  7. Guthrie, W. K. C. (1971). Socrates. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hegel, G. W. F. (2013). Vorlesungen über die Geschichte der Philosophie. Erster Teil. Berlin: Holzinger.Google Scholar
  9. Hua I. Husserl, E. (1950). Cartesianische Meditationen und Pariser Vorträge. S. Strasser (Ed.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  10. Hua III/1. Husserl, E. (1976). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philososophie. Erstes Buch: Allgemeine Einführung in die reine Phänomenologie. K. Schuhman (Ed.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  11. Hua V. Husserl, E. (1951). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philososophie. Drittes Buch: Die Phänomenologie und die Fundamente der Wissenschaften. M. Biemel (Ed.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  12. Hua VI. Husserl, E. (1962). Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie. Eine Einleitung in die phänomenologische Philosophie. W. Biemel (Ed.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  13. Hua VII. Husserl, E. (1956). Erste Philosophie (1923/24). Erster Teil: Kritische Ideengeschichte. R. Boehm (Ed.). Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  14. Hua XXIV. Husserl, E. (1984). Einleitung in die Logik und Erkenntnistheorie. Vorlesungen 19061907. U. Melle (Ed.). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Hua XXV. Husserl, E. (1987). Aufsätze und Vorträge (19111921). T. Nenon and H.-R. Sepp (Eds.). Dordrecht, Boston, Lancaster: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  16. Hua XXXV. Husserl, E. (2002). Einleitung in die Philosophie. Vorlesungen 1922/23. B. Goossens (Ed.). Dordrecht, Boston, Lancaster: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  17. Hua XLII. Husserl, E. (2014). Grenzprobleme der Phänomenologie. Analysen ders Unbewusstseins und der Instinkte. Metaphysik und späte Ethik. Texte aus dem Nachlass (19081937). R. Sowa and T. Vongehr (Eds.). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Hua-Dok III/4. Husserl, E. (1994). Briefwechsel. Die Freiburger Schüler. E. Schuhman and K. Schuhman (Eds.). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  19. Hua-Mat III. Husserl, E. (2001). Allgemeine Erkenntnistheorie 1902/1903. E. Schuhman (Ed.). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Hua-Mat IX. Husserl, E. (2012). Einleitung in die Philosophie. Vorlesungen 19161920. H. Jacobs (Ed.). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  21. Kant, I. (2011). Werke in sechs Bänden. Darmstadt: WBG.Google Scholar
  22. Kerferd, G. B. (1981). The sophistic movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Labriola, A. (1871). La dottrina di Socrate secondo Senofonte, Platone e Aristotele. Napoli: Stamperie della Regia Università.Google Scholar
  24. Le Rider, J. (2002). Freud, de l’Acropole au Sinaï. Le retour à l’Antique des Modernes viennois. Paris: PUF.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Majolino, C. (2017). The infinite academy. Husserl on how to be a platonist with some (Aristotelian?) help. In D. De Santis, E. Trizio (Eds.), Edmund Husserl between platonism and aristotelianism. Special issue of The New Yearbook for Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy, XV, pp. 164–221.Google Scholar
  26. Morrison, D. R. (Ed.). (2011). The Cambridge companion to Socrates. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Most, G. W. (2007). Socrates in Hegel. In M. Trapp (Ed.), Socrates in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (pp. 1–18). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Nietzsche, F. (1967). Werke in zwei Bänden. München: Carl Hanser Verlag.Google Scholar
  29. Patočka, J. (1999). Socrate. Rimini: Rusconi [Bilingual edition of: Sókratés, Prague 1991].Google Scholar
  30. Patočka, J. (2002). Plato and Europe. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Sassi, M. M. (2015). Indagine su Socrate. Persona, filosofo, cittadino. Torino: Einaudi.Google Scholar
  32. Spaventa, B. (2008). Opere. Milano: Bompiani.Google Scholar
  33. Windelband, W. (1912). Geschichte der antiken Philosophie. München: C. H. Beck’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
  34. Zanker, P. (1995). Die Maske des Sokrates. Das Bild des Intellektuellen in der antiken Kunst. München: Verlag C. H. Beck.Google Scholar
  35. Zeller, E. (1846). Philosophie der Griechen. Eine Untersuchung über Charakter, Gang und Hauptmomente ihrer Entwicklung. Zweither Teil: Sokrates, Platon, Aristoteles. Tübingen: Verlag von Ludwig Friedrich Fues.Google Scholar
  36. Zeller, E. (1886). Grundriss der Geschichte der griechischen Philosophie. Leipzig: O. R. Reisland.Google Scholar
  37. Zeller, E. (1892). Philosophie der Griechen in ihrer geschtlichen Entwicklung darsgestellt. Erster Theil: Allgemeine Einleitung. Vorsokratische Philosophie. Zweite Hälfte. Leipzig: O. R. Reisland.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy and Religious StudiesCharles UniversityPragueCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations