Search results

This is the first English translation of Herbert Witzenmann s seminal work, Strukturphänomenologie, which departs from the traditional phenomenological methods of Husserl, Sartre, and Merleau-Ponty to introduce a fresh approach to the nexus of consciousness and reality. In Structure Phenomenology, published open access, Witzenmann argues for the active mental, yet mostly pre-reflective, participation of humans in the emergence of individual consciousness of all kinds and the basic structure that determines it. While Witzenmann ascribes a derivative or memorative status to habitual states of phenomenal consciousness, even if they seem to refer to present objectivity, he proposes that the underlying formative processes be unveiled and explored through systematic first-person observation. Through his logically grounded and experience-based approach, he contends that it is not neural processes that produce consciousness, but rather one s own preconscious rootedness in reality which can be made conscious. Influenced by the writings of Rudolf Steiner and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Witzenmann s innovative approach casts new light on a number of philosophical, psychological, and scientific issues: from being and becoming to temporality and presence, and from remembering to mind and body. Even freedom takes on a new meaning when reality is not pre-given to human consciousness, but is rather a result of human participation in the basic process. This annotated translation makes Witzenmann s text accessible to an English audience for the first time and, with a comprehensive editorial introduction by Johannes Wagemann, situates his ground-breaking insights within the development of phenomenology, as well as in current philosophical and psychological debates. The ebook editions of this book are available open access under a CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 licence on bloomsburycollections.com

Abstract. Memory is typically conceptualized as a mental space where information is stored until it is retrieved for current processing. This archive account has been undermined by a multitude of findings, however, calling for a theoretical and also a methodological reorientation. In particular, we consider it timely to include an introspective mode of research into the study of memory because such introspective enquiry can provide insights into the recall process that go beyond those of third-person research. The limitations often associated with introspection (e.g., its seemingly subjective quality and its post hoc nature) are well justified – but only as long as the more immature impromptu introspections are concerned. A more systematically developed form of introspection can overcome these limitations. Such a systematic approach is outlined and used here to develop a taxonomy of mental processes involved in recall. Our observations lend support to a reconstruction account and allow for a differentiation of mental activities involved in various types of recall.

Abstract. The self has become a prominent field of research in psychology but despite its eminent first-person character, it is typically studied from a third-person perspective. Such a third-person approach is well suited to enquire into the behavioral expression of the sense of selfhood but it does not capture the core experience – the so-called qualia nature – of the self. In the current article we illuminate the challenges that a predominant third-person approach poses to an understanding of the self. We outline two levels of analysis that can complement and enrich a third-person, behavior-focused view, namely the level of experience and the level of conceptual insight. Both these additional levels are accessible via a first-person mode of enquiry and can reveal a degree of richness about the self that reaches beyond a third-person approach. We here provide a methodological justification for such a qualitative mode of enquiry, as well as a synopsis of findings from our own first-person research which involved introspective reports of the authors' experiences during meditation on geometrical shapes, words, and short phrases.

Das aristotelische und das machiavellistische Verständnis von Macht und Moral bilden das Spannungsfeld, in dem sich die Begriffsinhalte von Politik in Europa bewegen. Wird der Begriff zunächst noch für den staatlichen wie für den nichtstaatlichen Bereich verwendet, verengt sich das Bedeutungsfeld seit dem 18. Jahrhundert im Sinne von Machtkunst. Gegen Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts setzt sich die staatsmännische Bedeutung des Politikers als Kern des Begriffsinhalts durch, ebenso die Professionalisierung der Politik und ihrer Akteure. Insgesamt zeigt sich, dass die Wandlungen des Politiker-Begriffs entscheidend von den Auseinandersetzungen um den Begriff der Politik geprägt wurden. Nationale Unterschiede zeigen sich - wenn auch schwach - in der semantischen Nähe zwischen "Politiker" und "Staat". (ICE2)

Long description: Die Geschichte des Begriffs »Politik« reicht bis in die Antike zurück. Seitdem hat sich seine Bedeutung vielfach gewandelt und ausdifferenziert. Was »Politik« bedeutete und was als »politisch« bezeichnet wurde, veränderte sich je nach der historischen Situation des Wortgebrauchs. An den Beispielen Deutschland, Frankreich, England und Russland untersuchen die Autorinnen und Autoren des Bandes diesen semantischen Wandel für die Zeit vom 17. bis zum 20. Jahrhundert. Dabei entwickeln sie eine neue, umfassende Begriffsgeschichte des Politischen. -- Ausgezeichnet von H-Soz-u-Kult "Das Historische Buch 2009", Offene Kategorie (3. Platz).