Cohen’s Influence on Husserl’s Understanding of Kant’s Transcendental Method
-
Francesco Scagliusi
Abstract
This article argues that Husserl’s interpretation of Kant’s “regressive method” was influenced by Cohen’s account of the “transcendental method.” According to Cohen’s epistemological reading of the Critique of Pure Reason, Kant’s transcendental method consists in explaining the “fact of science” by using a regressive procedure from this fact to its conditions of possibility. Husserl ascribes, as Cohen does, this method to Kant himself. First, he criticizes Kant for regressively deducing conditions of possibility that elude any type of intuitive fulfillment. Second, he understands Kant as a rationalist who wanted to advance intellectualism and oppose empiricism. Finally, Husserl holds that Kant’s concept of experience refers to scientific experience. All these points are central aspects of Cohen’s interpretation. Moreover, from Husserl’s own copy of Cohen’s Kant’s Theory of Experience we can observe that he had read §12 on Kant’s transcendental method. Therefore, there is a Cohenian influence on Husserl’s criticism of Kant’s method.
References
Beiser, F. C. 2014. The Genesis of Neo-Kantianism, 1796–1880. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198722205.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Beiser, F. C. 2018. Hermann Cohen. An Intellectual Biography. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198828167.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Cohen, H. 1871/1987. “Kants Theorie der Erfahrung.” In Hermann Cohen Werke, Band 1, Teil 1.3 (Hildesheim, Zürich. New York: Georg Olms Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Cohen, H. 1883/1984. “Das Prinzip der Infinitesimal-Methode und seine Geschichte.” In Hermann Cohen Werke, Band 5 (Hildesheim, Zürich. New York: Georg Olms Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Cohen, H. 1877/1910/2001. “Kants Begründung der Ethik.” In Hermann Cohen Werke, Band 2 (Hildesheim, Zürich. New York: Georg Olms Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Cohen, H. 1914/1977. “Logik der reinen Erkenntnis.” In Hermann Cohen Werke, Band 6, 1. Teil (Hildesheim, Zürich. New York: Georg Olms Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Cohen, H. 1918/1987. “Kants Theorie der Erfahrung.” In Hermann Cohen Werke, Band 1, Teil 1.1 (Hildesheim, Zürich. New York: Georg Olms Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
De Boer, K., and S. Howard. 2018. “A Ground Completely Overgrown: Heidegger, Kant and the Problem of Metaphysics.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 27 (2): 358–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/09608788.2018.1450218.Search in Google Scholar
De Boer, K. 2020. Kant’s Reform of Metaphysics. The Critique of Pure Reason Reconsidered. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108897983Search in Google Scholar
Edel, G. 1987. “Einleitung zu Kants Theorie der Erfahrung.” In Hermann Cohen Werke, Band 1, Teil 1.1. Hildesheim, Zürich. New York: Georg Olms Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Edel, G. 2018. “Faktum Wissenschaft‘ oder ‚Einheit des Bewusstseins‘? Zur Frage des Ausgangspunktes der Philosophie: Kant, Cohen, Wiener Kreis.” In Philosophie und Wissenschaft bei Hermann Cohen, edited by C. Damböck, 205–25. Wien: Institut Wiener Kreis, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-58023-4_10Search in Google Scholar
Ewald, O. 1906. Kants Methodologie in ihren Grundzügen. Eine Erkenntnistheoretische Untersuchung. Berlin: Ernst Hofmann & Co.Search in Google Scholar
Giovanelli, M. 2018. “Zwei Bedeutungen des Apriori’. Hermann Cohens Unterscheidung zwischen metaphysischem und transzendentalem A Priori und die Vorgeschichte des relativierten A Priori.” In Philosophie und Wissenschaft bei Hermann Cohen, edited by C. Damböck, 177–203. Wien: Institut Wiener Kreis, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-58023-4_9Search in Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1929/1991. “Kant und das Problem der Metaphysik.” In Gesamtausgabe, Band 3. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.Search in Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1975. “Die Grundprobleme der Phänomenologie.” In Gesamtausgabe, Band 24. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.Search in Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1976. “Logik. Die Frage nach der Wahrheit.” In Gesamtausgabe, Band 21. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.Search in Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. 1977. “Phänomenologische Interpretation von Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft.” In Gesamtausgabe, Band 25. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann.Search in Google Scholar
Holenstein, E. 1972. Phänomenologie der Assoziation. Zu Struktur und Funktion eines Grundprinzips der passiven Genesis bei E. Husserl. Den Haag: Marinus Nijhoff.10.1007/978-94-010-2731-1Search in Google Scholar
Holzhey, H. 2009. “Neo-Kantianism and Phenomenology: The Problem of the Intuition.” In Neo-Kantianism in Contemporary Philosophy, edited by R. A. Makkreel, and S. Luft, 25–40. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1900/1913/1975. “Logische Untersuchungen, Erster Band.” In Husserliana, Band XVIII. Den Haag: Marinus Nijhoff.Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1901/1921/1984. “Logische Untersuchungen, Zweiter Band, Zweiter Teil.” In Husserliana, Band XIX/2. New York: Springer Science+Business Media.Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1913/1976. “Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie, Erstes Buch.” In Husserliana, Band III/1, (Den Haag: Marinus Nijhoff). Trans. F. Kersten. Dordrecht: Kluwer.10.1007/978-94-010-1041-2_7Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1954/1970. “Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie.” In Husserliana, Band VI, (Den Haag: Marinus Nijhoff). Trans. D. Carr. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1956. “Erste Philosophie (1923/24), Erster Teil.” In Husserliana, Band VII, (Den Haag: Marinus Nijhoff). Trans. S. Luft, and T. M. Naberhaus. Dordrecht: Springer.Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1966. “Analysen zur passiven Synthesis.” In Husserliana, Band XI, (Den Haag: Marinus Nijhoff). Trans. A. J. Steinbock. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1971. “Ideen zu einer reinen Phänomenologie und phänomenologischen Philosophie, Drittes Buch.” In Husserliana, Band V. Den Haag: Marinus Nijhoff.Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1973. “Ding und Raum. Vorlesungen 1907.” In Husserliana, Band XVI, (Den Haag: Marinus Nijhoff). Trans. R. Rojcewicz. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1974. “Formale und transzendentale Logik. Versuch einer Kritik der logischen Vernunft.” In Husserliana, Band XVII. Den Haag: Marinus Nijhoff.Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1983. “Studien zur Arithmetik und Geometrie.” In Husserliana, Band XXI. The Hague/Boston/Lancaster: Marinus Nijhoff Publishers.10.1007/978-94-009-6773-1Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1994a. “Briefwechsel. Band I. Die Brentanoschule.” In Husserliana: Edmund Husserl Dokumente, Band III. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 1994b. “Briefwechsel. Band V. Neukantianer.” In Husserliana: Edmund Husserl Dokumente, Band III. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.Search in Google Scholar
Husserl, E. 2001. “Natur und Geist.” In Husserliana, Band XXXII. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.10.1007/978-94-010-0958-4Search in Google Scholar
Jansen, J. 2014. “Taking a Transcendental Stance: Anti-representationalism and Direct Realism in Kant and Husserl.” In Husserl und die klassische deutsche Philosophie, edited by F. Fabbianelli, and S. Luft. Cham Heidelberg: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-01710-5_6Search in Google Scholar
Kant, I. 1781/1787/1998. Kritik der reinen Vernunft, trans. P. Guyer, and A. W. Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kant, I. 1783/2004. Prolegomena zu einer jeden künftigen Metaphysik, die als Wissenschaft wird auftreten können, trans. G. Hatfield. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Kern, I. 1964. Husserl und Kant. Eine Untersuchung über Husserls Verhältnis zu Kant und zu dem Neukantianismus. Den Haag: Marinus Nijhoff.10.1007/978-94-010-3601-6_5Search in Google Scholar
Lembeck, K-H. (1994). Platon in Marburg. Platon-Rezeption und Philosophiegeschichtsphilosophie bei Cohen und Natorp. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.Search in Google Scholar
Lerner, R. R. P. 2004. “Husserl Versus Neo-Kantianism Revisited: On Skepticism, Foundationalism, and Intuition.” The New Yearbook for Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy IV: 173–208.Search in Google Scholar
Luft, S. 2015. The Space of Culture. Towards a Neo-Kantian Philosophy of Culture (Cohen, Natorp, and Cassirer). Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198738848.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Luft, S. 2016. “Reconstruction and Reduction: Natorp and Husserl on Method and the Question of Subjectivity.” META. Research in Hermeneutics, Phenomenology, and Practical Philosophy VIII (2): 326–70.Search in Google Scholar
Luft, S. 2018. “Kant, Neo-Kantianism, and Phenomenology.” In The Oxford Handbook of the History of Phenomenology, edited by D. Zahavi, 45–67. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198755340.013.5Search in Google Scholar
Makkreel, R. A., and S. Luft. 2009. “Introduction.” In Neo-Kantianism in Contemporary Philosophy, edited by R. A. Makkreel, and S. Luft, 1–21. Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Natorp, P. 1912/2015. “Kant und die Marburger Schule,” Kantstudien, 17: 193–221. Trans. F. Bottenberg, “Kant and the Marburg School.” In The Neo-Kantian Reader, edited by S. Luft, 180–97. London: Routledge.10.1515/kant.1912.17.1-3.193Search in Google Scholar
Pollok, W. 2010. “The ‘Transcendental Method’: On the Reception of the Critique of Pure Reason in Neo-Kantianism.” In The Cambridge Companion to Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason, edited by P. Guyer, 346–79. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CCOL9780521883863.016Search in Google Scholar
Rendl, L. M. 2018. “Zu Hermann Cohens Reduktion der ‚transzendentalen Methode‘ auf die‚ regressive Lehrart‘ der Prolegomena.” In Philosophie und Wissenschaft bei Hermann Cohen, edited by C. Damböck, 135–44. Wien: Institut Wiener Kreis, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-58023-4_6Search in Google Scholar
Roesner, M. 2012. “Die Krise der europäischen Kultur und der phänomenologische Nihilismus: Grenzfiguren der Rationalität bei Cohen, Natorp und Husserl.” Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 66 (4): 566–82. https://doi.org/10.3196/004433012804741577.Search in Google Scholar
Seron, D. 2011. “Husserl et Cohen : deux conceptions opposées de la rationalité?” In Figuras de la racionalidade–Neokantismo e Fenomenologia, edited by F. Olivier, 125–40. Braga: Tipografia Abreau.Search in Google Scholar
Sieg, U. 1994. Aufstieg und Niedergang des Marburger Neukantianismus: die Geschichte einer philosophischen Schulgemeinschaft. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann.Search in Google Scholar
Staiti, A. 2014. Husserl’s Transcendental Phenomenology. Nature, Spirit, and Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107588875Search in Google Scholar
Staiti, A. 2015. “Husserl and Rickert on the Nature of Judgment.” Philosophy Compass 10 (12): 815–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12270.Search in Google Scholar
Staiti, A. 2018. “Pre-Predicative Experience and Life-World: Two Distinct Projects in Husserl’s Late Phenomenology.” In The Oxford Handbook of the History of Phenomenology, edited by D. Zahavi, 155–72. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198755340.013.12Search in Google Scholar
Vaihinger, H. (1922/1881). Kommentar zu Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft, Erster Band. Stuttgart, Berlin, Leipzig: Union deutsche Verlagsgesellschaft.Search in Google Scholar
Vaihinger, H. (1922/1892). Kommentar zu Kants Kritik der reinen Vernunft, Zweiter Band (Stuttgart, Berlin, Leipzig: Union deutsche Verlagsgesellschaft.Search in Google Scholar
© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- Cohen’s Influence on Husserl’s Understanding of Kant’s Transcendental Method
- Two Types of Neo-Kantianism. The Case of W. E. B. Du Bois’s and Alain L. Locke’s Race Theories
- Merleau-Ponty and the Intellectualist Theory of Perception
- Book Reviews
- Stephen Menn and Justin E. H. Smith: Anton Wilhelm Amo’s Philosophical Dissertations on Mind and Body
- Robb Dunphy: Hegel and the Problem of Beginning. Scepticism and Presuppositionlessness
- Elisabeth Theresia Widmer: Left-Kantianism in the Marburg School
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- Cohen’s Influence on Husserl’s Understanding of Kant’s Transcendental Method
- Two Types of Neo-Kantianism. The Case of W. E. B. Du Bois’s and Alain L. Locke’s Race Theories
- Merleau-Ponty and the Intellectualist Theory of Perception
- Book Reviews
- Stephen Menn and Justin E. H. Smith: Anton Wilhelm Amo’s Philosophical Dissertations on Mind and Body
- Robb Dunphy: Hegel and the Problem of Beginning. Scepticism and Presuppositionlessness
- Elisabeth Theresia Widmer: Left-Kantianism in the Marburg School
