Hegel and Husserl on Phenomenology, Logic, and the System of Sciences: A Reappraisal

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations

Abstract

Husserl envisages transcendental phenomenology as a radically founding science that lays bare the higher-order experiences whereby logic and a theory of science become constituted. On the other hand, according to a usual presentation of Hegel’s philosophy, phenomenology is “logic’s precondition,” and science presents itself as its “result.” This alleged precedence of Hegel’s phenomenology (with its experiential and historical horizons) regarding logic may be a motif behind the current affinities recently traced between Hegelian and Husserlian notions of phenomenology that highlight their views on experience, history, and the lifeworld. This paper offers instead a reconsideration of aspects of their philosophies mostly challenged or dismissed since the rise of positivism: a reappraisal of their views on the relationship between phenomenology, logic, and philosophy as an “absolute” system of sciences. The argument is made that the irreconcilable difference between their projects ultimately stands on the radical contrast between Hegel’s speculative-conceptual method and system of sciences and Husserl’s foundational science and method as experiential-phenomenological all the way through. Despite this methodological abyss, this paper vindicates their affinities in their refusal to segregate science from life, and their attempts to overcome modernity’s inherited fragmentation of culture by providing an all-unifying approach to philosophy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)301-330
Number of pages30
JournalHusserl Studies
Volume39
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 2023

Keywords

  • Absolute
  • Hegel
  • Husserl
  • Logic
  • Phenomenology
  • System of Sciences

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Hegel and Husserl on Phenomenology, Logic, and the System of Sciences: A Reappraisal'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this