Identity, Intersubjectivity and Communicative Action :: Philosophy Hume Papers

Identity, Intersubjectivity and Communicative ActionTraditionally, attempts to verify communications amidst individuals and cultures appeal to public objects, essential structures of experience, or universal reason. Contemporary continental school of thought demonstrates that not only such appeals, but fortuitously also the truly conception of isolated individuals and cultures whose communication such appeals were designed to insure, atomic number 18 problematic. and so we encounter and understand ourselves, and atomic number 18 also originally constituted, in relative to others. In view of this the traditional problem of communication is inverted and becomes that of how we are sufficiently differentiated from one another such that communication expertness appear problematic. Following Humes recognition that we cannot in principle have every experience of an experience transcending objectivity as such, Husserls Phenomenological Epoche (1) suspends judgement on whether or not s uch a realm of things-in-themselves exists. Thus our experiences of material objects and descriptions hence can no more be shown to correspond to such an object glass standard than can our experiences and descriptions of immaterial objects and conscious states. Consequently interpersonal and intercultural communications concerning the supposedly public objects etc. of the material orb seem no less problematic than Wittgenstein (2) and others have shown communication concerning the private objects of the immaterial world (of fantasies, dreams etc.) to be.Accepting that we cannot establish the objectivity of our experiences content, Kant nevertheless attempts to resist a sailplaning into relativism by insisting that they are mediated by rationally delineate categories which supposedly insure the transcendental or universal nature of their form, thereby providing an absolute standard against which we might check the veridicality of our descriptions of, and communications concerning , them. However as a priori preconditions of the possibility of experience such categories are obviously inexperienceable in themselves, and consequently must also fall to the phenomenological reduction. (3) Nevertheless, a moments reflection get out confirm that our experiences do indeed exhibit structure or form, and that we are able, even from within, or wholly upon the basis of, the (phenomenologically reduced) realm of, our experiences per se, to distinguish betwixt the flux of constantly changing and interrupted subjective appearances, and the relatively persistent and continuously existing objects constituted therein. Husserl confirms... cognitive acts, more generally, any cordial acts, are not isolated particulars, coming or going in the stream of consciousness without any interconnections. As they are ESSENTIALLY think to one another, they display a teleological coherence and corresponding connections ... And on these connections, which present an intelligible unity a great deal depends.