Idea of Evidence in Phenomenological Outlook: Deconstruction and Reactualization of Cartesian Legacy. First article: Excessiveness of Evidence

Keywords: evidence, excessiveness, hyperbolicity, truth, fulfillment of intention, idea, possibility, givenness

Abstract

The article deals with the problem of phenomenological interpretation of Cartesian idea of evidence. The author demonstrates that implicit but constitutive characteristic of evidence is a property of excessiveness. The analysis of its conceptual versions and methodological representations in Husserl, Marion and Derrida’s philosophies deconstructs some stereotype interpretations of evidence as an attribute of I-centric philosophical systems and also as a carrier of qualities of fullness and presence. The author claims that excessiveness of evidence has two main aspects: (1) non-belonging to the system assured by this very evidence and (2) tendency to self-surpassing (hyperbolization).  The excessiveness of evidence is shown in particular with regard to the system of thinking governed by the “truth-falsehood” opposition. The author brings to light a trend to the increasing of degrees of evidence as a consequence of phenomenological critique and deconstruction as methodological hyperbolizations of Cartesian doubt. The common ground between Marionian and Derridian critiques of Husserl’s conception of evidence is found that is inconsistency between the principle of fulfillment of intention and the unrealizable regulative of the “Idea in Kantian sense” as two main ways of representation of evidence idea in Husserlian phenomenology. It is shown that in accordance with the paradigm of possibility as the common denominator of phenomenological attitude in general the very same criticized evidence becomes assimilated in Marion’s conception of “saturated phenomena” (a principle of hyperbolical givenness)  and in Derridian deconstruction (hyperbolicity-excessiveness as heterogeneity and impossibility within the framework of his critique of presence). The author uncovers the essential connection between the idea of evidence and basic elements of deconstructive discourse, such as the metaphorical concept of secret and the quasi-concept différance.

Author Biography

Anna Ilyina, Hr. Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy, NAS Ukraine
PhD in Art Criticism, Junior research fellow of the Department of the History of Foreign Philosophy

References

Clarke, D. M. (1976). The Concept of Experience in Descartes 'Theory of Knowledge. Studia Leibnitiana, 8(1), 18-39.

Derrida, J. (1962). Introduction à l'Origine de la Géométrie de Husserl. In E. Husserl, L'Origine de la Géométrie (pp. 3-172). Paris: PUF.

Derrida, J. (1967a). “Genèse et structure” et la phenomenology. In J. Derrida, L'écriture et la différence (pp. 229-251).Paris: Seuil.

Derrida, J. (1967b).Cogito et histoire de la folie. In J. Derrida, L'écriture et la différence (pp. 51-98). Paris: Seuil.

Derrida, J. (1967c). La structure, le signe et le jeu dans le discours des sciences humaines. In J. Derrida, L'écriture et la différence (pp. 409-429). Paris: Seuil.

Derrida, J. (1972). La difference. In J. Derrida, Marges de la philosophie (pp. 1-29). Paris: Minuit.

Descartes, R. (1996). Œuvres complètes, in 11vol. (Ch. Adam, & P. Tannery, Eds.). Paris: Vrin.

Descartes, R. (2014). Meditations on First Philosophy. Metaphysical meditation. [In Ukrainian]. In O. Khoma (Ed.), “Meditations” of Descartes in mirror of modern interpretations (pp. 115-292). Kyiv: Dukh i Litera.

Dobko, T. (2007). Evidence and Truth in Edmund Husserl’s “Logical Investigations”. [In Ukrainian]. In A. Karas (Ed.), The Proceedings of the interdisciplinary conference “The Transfor-mation of Thinking and Knowledge Paradigms in the Context of New Issues in Fundamental, Social, Practical and Applied Philosophy” (pp. 19-21). Lviv: Ivan Franko Lviv National Uni-versity.

Doyon, M. (2014). The Transcendental Claim of Deconstruction. In Z. Direk, & L. Lawlor, (Eds.), A Companion to Derrida (pp. 132-149). Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118607138.ch8

Fink, E. (1939). The Problem of the Phenomenology of Edmund Husserl. In W. McKenna, R. M. Harlan, & L. E. Winters (Eds.), Apriori and world: European contributions to Husserlian phenomenology (pp. 21-55). The Hague, Netherlands: Nijhoff.

Forestier, F. (2012).The Phenomenon and the Transcendental: Jean-Luc Marion, Marc Richir, and the Issue of Phenomenalization. Continental Philosophy Review, 45(3), 381-402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11007-012-9227-8

Gschwandtner, Ch. (2014). Degrees of Givenness. On Saturation in Jean-Luc Marion. Blooming-ton: Indiana UP.

Gutner, G. (2010). Husserl’s Way to Evidence. [In Russian]. Vox. Philosophical Journal, 8. Retrieved from http://vox-journal.org/html/issues/vox8/115

Harpe, J. de la. (1938). De l'evidence cartesienne au probabilisme de Cournot: evidence, certitude et probabilite. Revue de théologie et de philosophie, 26, 32-49.

Heffernan, G. (1997). An Essay in Epistemic Kuklophobia: Husserl's Critique of Descartes' Conception of Evidence. Husserl Studies, 13(2), 89-140. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00304673

Heidegger, M. (1985). History of the concept of time. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Heidegger, M. (2003). Being and Time. [In Russian]. Kharkiv: Folio.

Held, K. (1986). Einleitung. In E. Husserl, Die phänomenologische Methode. Ausgewählte Texte I (S. 5-54). Stuttgart: Reclam.

Hemmendinger, D. (1975). Husserl’s Concepts of Evidence and Science. The Monist, 59(1), 81-97. https://doi.org/10.5840/monist19755913

Husserl, E. (1969). Formal and Transcendental Logic. Hague, Netherlands: Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-4900-8

Husserl, E. (1981). Formale und transzendentale Logik: Versuch einer Kritik der logischen Ver-nunft. Berlin: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110919783

Husserl, E. (1995). Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie (Erstes Buch, Bd. III/I). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Husserl, E. (2006). The Idea of Phenomenology: Five Lectures. [In Russian]. Saint-Petersburg: Humanitarian Academy.

Husserl, E. (2009). Logische Untersuchungen, mit einer Einführung und einem Namen und Sachregister von E. Ströker. Hamburg: Meiner.

Husserl, E. (2010). Cartesian Meditations. [In Russian]. Moscow: Akademicheskiy Project.

Husserl, E. (2012). Phenomenological Psychology: Lectures, Summer Semester, 1925. New York: Springer Science & Business Media.

Ilyina, A. (2014). Hyperbole of Transcendentalism and Hyperbole in Transcendentalism: Kant, Husserl, Derrida. [In Ukrainian]. Multiversum: Philosophical Almanac, 3, 55-81.

Kelly, Th. (2014). Evidence. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Re-trieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2014/entries/evidence/

Lawlor, L. (2002). Derrida and Husserl: The Basic Problem of Phenomenology. Bloomington: Indiana UP.

Lefèvre, R. (1958). Le criticisme de Descartes. Paris: PUF.

Levinas, E. (2004). Discovering Existence with Husserl and Heidegger. [In Russian]. In: E. Levinas, Selected writings: Difficult Freedom (pp. 162-207). Moscow: ROSSPEN.

Lohmar, D. (1998). Erfahrung und Kategoriales Denken: Hume, Kant und Husserl über vorprädi-kative Erfahrung und prädikative Erkenntnis. Dordrecht: Springer-Science, & Business Media.

MacAvoy, L. (2005). Truth and evidence in Descartes and Levinas. In S. H. Daniel (Ed.), Current Continental Theory and Modern Philosophy (pp. 21-35). Evanston: Northwestern UP.

Marion, J.-L. (1996). Questions cartésiennes II. Sur l'égo et sur Dieu. Paris: PUF.

Marion, J.-L. (1998). Reduction and Givenness: Investigations of Husserl, Heidegger, and Phenomenology. Evanston: Northwestern UP.

Marion, J.-L. (2005). The Reason of the Gift. In I. Leask, & E. Cassidy (Eds.), Givenness and God: Questions of Jean-Luc Marion (pp. 101-134). New York: Fordham UP.

Marion, J.-L. (2012). In the Self's Place: The Approach of Saint Augustine. Stanford: Stanford UP.

Marion, J.-L. (2014). The Saturated Phenomenon. [In Russian]. In: A. Yampolskaya, S. Sholokhova, (Post)Phenomenology: New Phenomenology in France and beyond (pp. 63-99). Mos-cow: Akademicheskiy Project.

Martin, W. (2007). Descartes and the phenomenological tradition. In J. Broughton, & J. Carriero (Eds.). A Companion to Descartes (pp. 496-512). Oxford: Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470696439.ch29

Mohanty, J. N. (1973). Towards a Phenomenology of Self-Evidence. In D. Carr, & E. S. Casey (Eds.), Explorations in phenomenology. Papers of the Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy. (Series: Selected Studies in Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy). (Vol. 4, pp. 208-229). The Hague: Nijhoff. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1999-6_8

Molchanov, V. (1999). The Premise of Identity and the Analytics of Differences. [In Russian]. In: Logos, 1999, 10. Retrieved from http://www.ruthenia.ru/logos/number/1999_11_12/12.htm#_ftn1

Molchanov, V. (2004). Differentiation and Experience. The Phenomenology of Non-Aggressive Consciousness. [In Russian]. Moscow: Modest Kolerov, & Tri kvadrata.

Razeev, D. (2001). A Problem of Evidence in Husserl’s Phenomenology. [In Russian]. In Between Metaphysics and Experience. Proceedings of the colloquium “The influence of German philosophy on the Russian philosophy of the XIX century to the beginning of the XX century and the further development of philosophy in Germany and in Russia” (pp. 105-137). Saint-Petersburg: Saint-Petersburg Philosophical Society. Retrieved from http://anthropology.ru/ru/text/razeev-dn/problema-ochevidnosti-v-fenomenologii-gusserlya

Ricoeur, P. (1954). Kant et Husserl. Kant-Studien, 46, 44-67.
Rotenstreich, N. (2013). Evidence and the Aim of Cognitive Activity. In A.-T. Tymieniecka (Ed.), The Human Being in Action: The Irreducible Element in Man. Part II: Investigations at the Intersection of Philosophy and Psychiatry (pp. 245-258). New York: Springer-Science, & Business Media.

Sang-Ki, K. (1976). The Problem of the Contingency of the World in Husserl's Phenomenology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Ströker, E. (1993). Husserl's Transcendental Phenomenology. Stanford: Stanford UP.

Ströker, E. (1997). Husserl's Principle of Evidence: The Significance and Limitations of a Methodo-logical Norm of Phenomenology as a Science. In E. Ströker, The Husserlian Foundations of Science (pp. 45-82). Dordrecht: Springer, & Kluwer.

Zahavi, D. (2003). Husserl’s phenomenology. Stanford: Stanford UP.

Abstract views: 317
PDF Downloads: 98
Published
2016-12-16
How to Cite
Ilyina, A. (2016). Idea of Evidence in Phenomenological Outlook: Deconstruction and Reactualization of Cartesian Legacy. First article: Excessiveness of Evidence. Sententiae, 35(2), 23-40. https://doi.org/10.22240/sent35.02.023
Section
ARTICLES

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.