Advertisement

Continental Philosophy Review

, Volume 48, Issue 2, pp 123–142 | Cite as

Anonymity and personhood: Merleau-Ponty’s account of the subject of perception

  • Sara Heinämaa
Article

Abstract

Several commentators have argued that with his concept of anonymity Merleau-Ponty breaks away from classical Husserlian phenomenology that is methodologically tied to the first person perspective. Many contemporary commentators see Merleau-Ponty’s discourse on anonymity as a break away from Husserl’s framework that is seen as hopelessly subjectivistic and solipsistic. Some judge and reproach it as a disastrous misunderstanding that leads to a confusion of philosophical and empirical concerns. Both parties agree that Merleau-Ponty’s concepts of anonymity mark a divergence from classical Husserlian phenomenology. I will question this view and demonstrate that Merleau-Ponty’s discourse on anonymity remains Husserlian in two important senses: (1) it analyses senses in terms of constituting selves and communities of such selves, and (2) it accounts for the formation of experience by the temporal sedimentation of intentional activity. The argument proceeds in four steps. The first section argues against the widely spread notion according to which Merleau-Ponty’s anonymous subject is collective. In the second section, I offer an alternative reading by demonstrating that Merleau-Ponty uses the term “anonymous” primarily to characterize the lived body of a personal subject. In section three, I introduce Merleau-Ponty’s idea of trace and show that for him both the perceived thing and the perceiving body are traces and as such refer to earlier constitutive acts of alien subjects. I then argue that Husserl’s concepts of sedimentation are crucial for the understanding of this idea. Finally, in section four, I show how Husserl’s theory of depresentation informs Merleau-Ponty’s discourse on anonymity.

Keywords

Anonymity Personal Subject Merleau-Ponty Husserl Perception Embodiment Sedimentation Depresentation Ego Phenomenology 

References

  1. Al-Saji, Alia. 2008. “A past which has never been present”: Bergsonian dimensions in Merleau-Ponty’s theory of the prepersonal. Research in Phenomenology 38: 41–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barbaras, Renaud. 1991. De l’être du phénomène: Sur l’ontologie de Merleau-Ponty. Grenoble: Jérôme Millon.Google Scholar
  3. Barbaras, Renaud. 2004. The being of the phenomenon: Merleau-Ponty’s ontology (trans: Toadvine, Ted and Lawlor, Len). Bloomington, Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bergo, Bettina. 2002. Philosophy as Perspectiva Artificialis: Merleau-Ponty’s critique of Husserlian constructivism. In Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Husserl at the Limits of Phenomenology, eds. Len Lawlor and Bettina Bergo, 155–182. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bernet, Rudolf. 2006. Zur Phänomenologie von Trieb und Lust bei Husserl. In Interdisziplinäre Perspektiven der Phänomenologie: Neue Felder der Kooperation: Cognitive Science, Neurowissenschaften, Psyhologie, Soziologie, Politikwissenschaft und Religionswissenschaft, ed. Dieter Lohmar, and Dirk Fonfara, 38–53. Dordrect: Springer.Google Scholar
  6. Biceaga, Victor. 2010. The concept of passivity in Husserl’s phenomenology. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Butler, Judith. 2005. Merleau-Ponty and the touch of Malebrance. In The Cambridge companion to Merleau-Ponty, eds. Taylor Carman and Mark B.N. Hansen, 181–205. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Carman, Taylor, and Mark B.N. Hansen. 2005. Introduction. In The Cambridge companion to Merleau-Ponty, ed. T. Carman, and M.B.N. Hansen, 1–25. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Depraz, Natalie. 2001. Pulsion, instinct, désir: Que signifie Trieb zhez Husserl?—A l’épreuve des perspectives Freud, Merleau-Ponty, Jonas et Scheler. Alter Revue de Phénoménologie 9: 113–125.Google Scholar
  10. Derrida, Jacques. 1976. La voix et le phénomène. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. In English Speech and phenomena (trans: David B. Allison). Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
  11. Fink, Eugen. 1988. VI. Cartesianische Meditation: Teil 2: Ergänzungsband, Husserliana: Dokumente: Band II/2. Ed. Guy van Kerckhoven. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Press.Google Scholar
  12. Fink, Eugen. 1995. The sixth Cartesian meditation: The idea of a transcendental theory of method (trans: Ronald Bruzina). Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hart, James. 1998. Genesis, instinct, and reconstruction: Nam-In Lee’s Edmund Husserl’s Phänomenologie der Instinkte. Husserl Studies 15: 101–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heidegger, Martin. 1927. Sein und Zeit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. In English Being and time (trans: John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson). Oxford: Blackwell, 1992.Google Scholar
  15. Heinämaa, Sara. 2002. From decisions to passions: Merleau-Ponty’s interpretation of Husserl’s reduction. In Merleau-Ponty’s reading of Husserl, ed. Ted Toadvine, and Lester Embree, 127–146. Boston, London: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heinämaa, Sara. 2003. The living body and its position in metaphysics: Merleau-Ponty’s dialogue with Descartes. In Metaphysics, facticity, interpretation: Phenomenology in the Nordic countries, ed. Dan Zahavi, Sara Heinämaa, and Hand Ruin, 23–48. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  17. Heinämaa, Sara. 2011. The self and the others: Common topics for Husserl and Wittgenstein. The Southern Journal of Philosophy 50(2): 234–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hopkins, Burt. 2011. The philosophy of Husserl. Durkham: Acumen.Google Scholar
  19. Husserl, Edmund. [1929] 1981. Formale und transzendentale Logik. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
  20. Husserl, Edmund. [1939] 1999. Erfahrung und Urteil: Untersuchung zur Genealogie der Logik. Ed. Ludwig Landgrebe. Hambrug: Felix Meiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  21. Husserl, Edmund. 1950. Cartesianische Meditationen und pariser Vorträge, Husserliana, Band I. Ed. Stephan Strasser. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  22. Husserl, Edmund. 1952. Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie, Zweites Buch: Phänomenologische Untersuchungen zur Konstitution, Husserliana, Band IV. Ed. Marly Biemel. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  23. Husserl, Edmund. 1954. Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie: Eine Einleitung in die phänomenologischen Philosophie, Husserliana, Band VI. Ed. Walter Biemel. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  24. Husserl, Edmund. 1968. Phänomenologische Psychologie, Vorlesungen Sommersemester 1925, Husserliana IX. Ed. Walter Biemel. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  25. Husserl, Edmund. 1973a. Experience and judgment: Investigations in a genealogy of logic (trans: James Spencer Churchill and Karl Ameriks). Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Husserl, Edmund. 1973b. Zur Phänomenologie der Intersubjektivität, Texte aus dem Nachlass, Zweiter Teil 1921–28, Husserliana, XIV ed. Iso Kern, The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  27. Husserl, Edmund. 1973c. Zur Phänomenologie der Intersubjektivität. Texte aus dem Nachlass, Dritter Teil (19291935). Ed. Iso Kern. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  28. Husserl, Edmund. 1978. Formal and transcendental logic (trans: Dorion Cairns). Second printing. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1978.Google Scholar
  29. Husserl, Edmund. 1988. The crisis of European sciences and transcendental phenomenology: An introduction to phenomenological philosophy (trans: Davi Carr). Evanston: Northwestern University.Google Scholar
  30. Husserl, Edmund. 1993. Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy, second book: Studies in the phenomenological constitution (trans: Richard Rojcewicz and Andre Schuwer). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  31. Husserl, Edmund. 2001. Die Bernauer Manuskripte Über das Zeitbewusstein (1917/18), Husserliana, Band XXXIII. Eds. Rudolf Bernet and Dieter Lohmar. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  32. James, William. [1892] 2001. Psychology, the briefer course. Mineola, New York: Dover.Google Scholar
  33. Lawlor, Len. 2002. Verflechtung: The Triple significance of Merleau-Ponty’s course notes on Husserl’s “the origin of geometry”. In Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Husserl at the limits of phenomenology, eds. Len Lawlor and Bettina Bergo. ix–xxxvii. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Lawlor, Len. 2003. Thinking through French philosophy: The being of the question. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Lawlor, Len. 2006. The implications of immanence: Toward a new concept of life. New York: Fordham.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Leder, Drew. 1990. The absent body. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. Madison, Gary. 1981. The phenomenology of Merleau-Ponty: A search for the limits of consciousness. Athens: Ohio University Press. Originally published as La phénoménologie de Merleau-Ponty: une recherche des limits de la conscience, 1973.Google Scholar
  38. Meacham, Darian. 2008. Phenomenological approaches to the political in Patocka and Merleau-Ponty. Katholike Universiteit Leuven.Google Scholar
  39. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. [1945] 1993. Phénoménologie de la perception. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  40. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. [1960] 1998. Signes. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  41. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1962. Un inédit de Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Revue de Métaphysique et Morale 67(4): 401–409.Google Scholar
  42. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. [1963] 1964. L’Œil et l’esprit. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  43. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1964. Le visible et l’invisible. Ed. Claude Lefort. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  44. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. [1964] 1987. Signs (trans: Richard C. McCleary). Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1975. The visible and the invisible (trans: Alphonso Lingis). Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1989a. Eye and mind (trans: Carleton Dallery). In The primacy of perception and other essays on phenomenological psychology, the philosophy of art, history and politics, ed. James M. Edie, 159–190. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  47. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1989b. An unpublished text by Maurice Merleau-Ponty (trans: Arleen B. Dallery). In The primacy of perception and other essays on phenomenological psychology, the philosophy of art, history and politics, ed. James M. Edie, 3–11. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1995. Phenomenology of perception (trans: Collin Smith). New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  49. Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1998. Notes de cours sur L’origine de la géometrie de Husserl. Transcribed and ed. Franck Robert. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  50. Mohanty, Jitendra Nath. 1997. On Derrida’s reading of Husserl. In Essentialism and transcendental philosophy. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Mohanty, Jitendra Nath. 2005. Husserl’s concept of intentionality. In Edmund Husserl: Critical assessment of leading philosophers, ed. Rudolf Bernet, Donn Welton, and Gina Zavota. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  52. Nam-In, Lee. 1993. Edmund Husserl’s Phänomenologie der Instinkte. Dordrect: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  53. Nam-In, Lee. 2002. Static-phenomenological and genetic-phenomenological concept of primordiality in Husserl’s fifth Cartesian meditation. Husserl Studies 18(3): 105–123.Google Scholar
  54. O’Neill, John. 1986. The specular body: Merleau-Ponty and Lacan on infant self and other. Synthese 66(2): 201–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Proust, Marcel. [1871] 1988. À la recherché du temps perdu: Du côté de chez Swann. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  56. Proust, Marcel. 1981. Remembrance of things past: Volume I: Swann’s way (trans: Lydia Davis). London, New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  57. Sartre, Jean-Paul. [1943] 1998. L’être et le néant: essai d’ontologie phénoménologique, Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  58. Sartre, Jean-Paul. 1956. Being and nothingness: A phenomenological essay on ontology (trans: Hazel E. Barnes). New York: Washington Square Press.Google Scholar
  59. Smith, Nicolas. 2010. Towards a phenomenology of repression. Stockholm: Stockholm University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Soffer, Gail. 1998. The other as alter ego: A genetic approach. Husserl Studies 15(3): 151–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stawarska, Beata. 2004. Anonymity and sociality: The convergence of psychological and philosophical currents in Merleau-Ponty’s ontological theory of intersubjectivity. CHIASMI International 5: 295–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Steinbock, Anthony. 1995. Home and beyond: Generative phenomenology after Husserl. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Stoller, Silvia. 2000. Reflections on feminist Merleau-Ponty skepticism. Hypatia 15(1): 175–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Toadvine, Ted. 2003. Merleau-Ponty’s reading of Husserl: A chronological overview. In Merleau-Ponty’s reading of Husserl, ed. Ted Toadvine, and Lester Embree, 227–286. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  65. Waldenfels, Bernhard. 2000a. Das leibliche Selbst: Vorlesungen zur Phänomenologie des L eibens. Ed. Regula Giuliani. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  66. Waldenfels, Bernhard. 2000b. Metamorphosen des Cogito: Stichproben französicher Descartes-Lektüre. In Descartes im Diskurs der Neuzeit, ed. W.F. Nibel, A. Horn, and H. Schnädelbach, 249–370. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  67. Zahavi, Dan. 2002. Anonymity and first-personal givenness: An attempt at reconciliation. In Subjektivität–Verantwortung–Wahrheit: Neue Aspekte der Phänomenologie Edmund Husserls, ed. D. Carr, and C. Lotz, 75–89. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  68. Zahavi, Dan. 2003. Husserl’s phenomenology. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland

Personalised recommendations