Advertisement

Angst as Evidence: Shifting Phenomenology’s Measure

  • Christos Hadjioannou
Chapter
Part of the Philosophers in Depth book series (PID)

Abstract

Phenomenology is a method that aims to ground its findings in evidence, so as to counter metaphysics. This chapter argues that an important aspect of Being and Time is to radicalize the basic concept of evidence that is operative in Husserlian phenomenology, conceived in terms of apodictic certainty, which commits Husserl to mentalist evidentialism. Heidegger overcomes mentalist evidentialism and relaunches phenomenology on the basis of a different “epistemic” measure, which turns phenomenology into a hermeneutics of facticity. The chapter analyzes the fundamental mood of angst in terms of evidence, so as to better illustrate the methodological role it plays in Being and Time. Angst serves as the hermeneutic equivalent to what analytic epistemologists call “justifier of knowledge”, that is, it takes on the function of evidence that phenomenologically grounds the interpretation of the basic structures of Dasein, as these are disclosed in authentic existence.

Keywords

Angst Anxiety Phenomenology Evidentialism Justification Evidence 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Work on this chapter was part of the research activities in the context of my Irish Research Council Postdoctoral Fellowship at University College Dublin, under the mentorship of Professor Dermot Moran. I would like to thank Lukas Makovicky and an anonymous reviewer for helpful comments on past versions of this chapter. I would also to thank Bence Marosan for recommending key literature on Husserl’s notion of evidence, during a conversation we had in Warsaw in 2017.

References

  1. Berghofer, Philipp. 2018. “On the Nature and Systematic Role of Evidence: Husserl as a Proponent of Mentalist Evidentialism?” European Journal of Philosophy 1–20.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ejop.12405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blattner, William. 2007. Heidegger’s ‘Being and Time’: A Reader’s Guide. London: Bloomsbury Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Carman, Taylor. 2003. Heidegger’s Analytic. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Crowell, Steven. 2013. Normativity and Phenomenology in Husserl and Heidegger. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Dahlstrom, Daniel. 2001. Heidegger’s Concept of Truth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dreyfus, Hubert. 1991. Being-in-the-World: A Commentary on Heidegger’s Being and Time Division I. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Freeman, Lauren. 2014. “Toward a Phenomenology of Mood.” The Southern Journal of Philosophy 55 (4): 445–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Guignon, Charles. 1984. “Moods in Heidegger’s Being and Time.” What is an Emotion? Classic and Contemporary Readings. Edited by R. Solomon and C. Calhoun. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Hadjioannou, Christos. 2013. Befindlichkeit as retrieval of Aristotelian διάθεσις. Heidegger reading Aristotle in the Marburg years. In Heideggers Marburger Zeit: Themen, Argumente, Konstellationen. Edited by Tobias Keiling. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.Google Scholar
  10. Hadjioannou, Christos. 2015. The emergence of mood in Heidegger’s phenomenology. PhD doctoral thesis. University of Sussex.Google Scholar
  11. Hadjioannou, Christos. 2018. Heidegger’s Critique of Techno-science as a Critique of Husserl’s Reductive Method. In Heidegger on Technology. Edited by Aaron James Wendland, Christopher Merwin, and Christos Hadjioannou. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Haugeland, John. 2013. Dasein Disclosed: John Haugeland’s Heidegger. Edited by Joseph Rouse. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Heidegger, Martin. 1962. Being and Time. Translated by John Macquarrie & Edward Robinson. New York: Harper & Row Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Heidegger, Martin. 1996. Being and Time. A Translation of “Sein und Zeit” (7th ed.). Translated by Joan Stambaugh. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
  15. Husserl, Edmund. 1982. Cartesian Meditations: An Introduction to Phenomenology. Translated by Dorion Cairns. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
  16. Husserl, Edmund. 1983. Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. Translated by F. Kersten. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Öktem, Ülker. 2009. “Husserl’s Evidence Problem.” Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology 9 (1): 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Schmid, Hans Bernard. 2001. “Apodictic Evidence.” Husserl Studies 17 (3): 217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Stephen, Mulhall. 1996. “Can There Be an Epistemology of Moods?” Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 41: 191–210 (194).  https://doi.org/10.1017/s1358246100006111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wrathall, Mark. 2001. “Background Practices, Capacities, and Heideggerian Disclosure.” Heidegger, Coping, and Cognitive Science: A Festschrift for Hubert Dreyfus, vol. 2. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christos Hadjioannou
    • 1
  1. 1.Sofia UniversitySofiaBulgaria

Personalised recommendations