Date: Sat, 07 Mar 1998 20:20:24 -0500 (EST)
Dear Malcolm and Micheal,
In following your discussion which has been very useful and enlightening I've
had a few thoughts that I'd like to add which you may or may not find helpful.
First off, I think its erroneous to charcaterize Husserl's ego as "controlling"
Intending, but not controlling. In Ideas I the prue ego is mostly a pole in
the intentional relation. It also has no contents, that is reserved for
A second thought is that Husserl's first publication of his work on time was
edited by Martin Heidegger! Heidegger states in his preface to this edition that
"The expostion of the intention character of time consciousness andthe developing fundamental elucidation of intentionality in general is basic to this study"
"even today this term 'intentionality' is no all-explanitory word but
one which designates a central *problem*"
This volume contained Husserl's work up to 1910. His introduction was dated
1928. This work represents Husserls early thinking on time which makes a
dramatic shift after 1907. The first stage is characterized by the
thinking of logical investigations in which Husserl is focusing more on the
contents of consciousness in order to deal with the problem of logic and
psychologism. At this point Husserl claims that there is no phenomenal ego.
This is the notion of time and intentionality that Heidegger is using when
he refers to Husserl's work in the GA26 (an excellent work, thank you Micheal)
After this point Husserl's work makes a dramatic shift due to his further
studies in time. After 1907 the flow of consciousness and the self-
constituting nature of time become thematic so the shift is away from the
contents of consciousness to the acts of consciousness. It si during this
period that Transcendence takes on a new meaning and Husserl "discovers"
the pure ego as he says in the second edition of the Logical Investigations.
It seems to me that Heidegger was obviously familiar with Husserl's work
on time and that they bith went in a similar direction after that original
work to focus less on what Brough calls the schematic representation of
time and to a more *lived* understanding of time.
I think that there were more thoughts that I had but I stop for now and
see what you make of this.
keep it coming,
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---