第1个回答 2022-06-30
本文是我于2008年在第22届世界哲学大会上提交的一篇关于现象学的论文。中文的，请参考《存在是什么》一书中关于现象学的篇章，P113--116.
核心提示： 现象学把客观事物在人的意识中的显现作为其研究对象。根据这个方法，只有可感觉的客观事物的可感觉到的表面才能在人的意识中形成显现，而不可感觉到的存在以及客观事物内在的部分或者本质存在，是无法被感觉到而在人的意识中显示出来的。因此，现象学根本无法触及到客观事物的内在本质，更无法触及到本体。因此，现象学所谓的否认本体存在，并不是其理论果真能否认本体之存在，而是其理论根本无法触及到本体而已。在这一点上，他们和实证主义哲学的论调是一样的，实证主义哲学的观点就是，凡是科学的方法无法确证的，就是不存在的。 呵呵呵。
因为上述现象学的严重缺陷，导致萨特，海德格尔，撒谬推论出的很多结论都是荒唐的。
The phenomena in the phenomenology, different from the objective phenomena in the scientific study, is in fact refers to the reflection idea of the objective phenomena in the consciousness. In the scientific study, the study object is the objective thing/phenomena, but in the phenomenology, the study object is the reflection of the phenomena in the consciousness, the reflection idea in the consciousness regarded as the essence of the objective object. It ignores the distance between the object and the essence hidden in the object. It agree the function of the objective object, but , this function is only to give the reflection in the consciousness. This means, the reflection idea the phenomenology could get is only from the natural phenomena or object. If something can not give reflection in the consciousness, then, these things would not be in their study. Such as the rules or truth in the space which not felt by people, are not to be studied by the phenomenology. In this sense, the phenomenology could not get in tough with the essence or the rules or the Onto which regarded as the main study object in the thousands years philosophy history. This point could be the reason why some person even deny the Onto or the existence of the Onto.
People’s feeling from the external objective thing or phenomena is different. So, the reflection in people’s consciousness is different. Then, the understanding about the reflection could be also different. This is the reason why there are various kinds of answer or idea in the phenomenology.
Moreover, the way to get the answer or theory in the phenomenology is a big problem. Mostly, people get the answer or idea only by their subjective understanding or thinking, but not by some solid theory foundation or confirmed logical basis. It seams that people are only interested to produce some kind idea or answer regardless of the question such as why or how come. Also, there is no test for their answer, or they do not want to do any test with human’s knowledge or history or practical world situation.
But, in philosophy, the basic way is the logic. Any deduction must go with the logical way, but not subjective interest or passion. Of course, this is not to say that any answer in the philosophy must be fully correct, but the thinking way must be correct, or to comply with the logic at least.
However, the thinking way in the phenomenology is too much subjective, without or with little solid logical basis, with the answer or idea mostly unable to stand for the test.
As we see in 20th century, there were various kinds of theory in the phenomenology, but none of them could be regarded as the “truth” or the confirmed human’s knowledge. At the same time, philosophy looks more confused ,in a mess.
Of course , at the very beginning of the phenomenology , the purpose was acceptable. At that time, the specific object in the nature gradually were studied very well by the science, philosophy seems lost many study object. Then, the philosophers began looking for the study object for philosophy. Some eyed on the logic such as Russell, some took some kind logical relation such as Wittgenstein, and some focused on the field of consciousness such as Hussel. These philosophers thought the logic or relation or the consciousness would not occupied by the science.
For Hussel, another point was about the issue of the cognition. He attempted to find the way to resolve the problem between the object and the subject, the internal and external , the material and the mind etc.
This view angle was right. In fact, this is the old problem and the main study object in the whole philosophy history. Kant and Hegel and other main philosophers all mainly made their contribution in this field. Of course, after hegel, this was still the problem.
It was clear that phenomenology wanted to combine the external and the internal, the subject and the object. And it was also clear that the way in the phenomenology is not correct as we explained in above.
The phenomenology do not like the test, but any theory must be tested. Here, I tried to test the phenomenology with the phenomenology history and human’s history, in order to found out the main mistake in the phenomenology.
The precondition for the reflection of the phenomena is the consciousness, and the precondition for the consciousness is the people’s existing. Martin Heidegger noted this well. He developed the phenomenology from Husserl’s consciousness to people’s existing. Husserl ever thought Heidegger’s study not the phenomenology, but in fact, Heidegger’s was .Husserl’s is mainly from the angle of cognition, Heidegger brought the ontological basis for Husserl’s consciousness reflection, this ontological basis is the people’s existing. As per Heidegger, the reflection was not only in the consciousness, but regarded as the existence. By this sense, a people’s living appearance is just this people’s essence. This is to say that the essence for people is different, different person has different essence. Here ,we come to a point, in Phenomenology, the essence for the human is not the same .
But , as per the common value and the meaning of the essence in the philosophy, it is really ridiculous to say that the essence for the human is not the same. It is very easy to disprove thus answer. If the essence of the people is not the same, then, why all the people in the world are with the same biological type and same structure and physiological function? Then, what and how can we distinguish the human with other animal?
As per his theory, Heidegger’s understanding about human history is also incredible and ridiculous. He said only the great affairs happened would establish the human’s history, the art, thinking, the truth almost did nothing for human’s history although they looked very attractive.
Following this kind theory, some body would think to distinguish the people. If to say the essence of the people different, then which kind essence the people in different area has? Hitler did so. Together with the racialism ,Hitler produced the thought that only the Germany people is gifted with the best essence. Heidegger ignored the common value, the law and the truth, only believed in the great event made by people, Hitler did so, he destroyed all the law, the common value, the civilization, the moral, with the only purpose to make great affairs with war to produce the history as per his interest.
Here, we could see Heidegger’s theory could give support to the racialism and fascist, which brought disaster in world war two.
Of course, human’s history already proved that any great affairs should be criticized finally by the way or standard from human’s common value, the law, the moral. Hitler‘s “great affairs” were confirmed as the disaster in human’s history, and Hitler as one of the worst criminals in human’s history.
Then, shall we criticize Heidegger’s phenomenology theory? Were they guilty or not ?
Sartre continued. He said the result of the movement in the consciousness could not be confirmed .He ever made an example. When we see an apple, but in our consciousness, the reflection is not certainly to be about that apple, probably about pear or orange or other. Yeah, for this point, I agree. Of course, the movement in the consciousness is not fully controlled by our logical thinking, seems in free condition. Sartre just said these uncertain movement and flexibility in the consciousness is the freedom, the freedom of people!
The consciousness is before the action, and the movement in the consciousness is selected by the freedom of the consciousness, so , Sartre said it is the free selection of the consciousness to decide a person’s essence , not the action as Heidegger’s theory. Sartre said a person’s action or living is the result of his freedom selection.
But, here, I want to ask, can we regard the freedom of the consciousness as the real freedom of the people? Is a person’s real living condition selected by this person’s freedom of his consciousness? Slave’s consciousness is also of free, then, can we say the slave’s real living condition is also free? Can we say the slave’s miserable condition is selected by the slave themselves?
Not of course. The freedom the human ever struggled for is not the freedom in the consciousness, but the pre-requisite term for the living and happiness. A person’s real action and living condition is firstly decided by the living demand and the body’s freedom, not by the consciousness freedom.
As per Sartre’s freedom theory, he then also ignored the law ,the common value, the truth. On this point, he was same with Heidegger, although their phenomenology theory is clearly different. Sartre ever did so in his personal life. He rejected the marriage law, Simone de Beauvior was his wife, but not under the marriage law. He thought to reject the marriage law could show his free selection, show the law or common value rules are of no use.
Here, I want to ask, since you Sartre reject the law or the rule, then, why did you still want a wife like other men? Here, we could see the limitation of the phenomenology, it can not go deep inside the essence, can not get in touch with the root basic reason of the phenomena.
About 40year before, “Cultural Revolution “happened in China, lasted 10 years. Millions people were put into jail without any guilty, millions were tortured to death. That was absolutely antihuman, anti civilization, anti the common value, but, Sartre ever supported that as per his theory. Of course, He could not be put in jail , as he was not in China.
Heidegger’s phenomenology theory ever supported the fascist, Sartre’s ever supported the cultural revolution. Why? The reason was clear now, for all them four rejected the common value, the human’s civilization law. This mistake is resulted from the wrong study way of the phenomenology.
After Satre, phenomenology still continued, with many kinds name such as structuralism and post-structuralism. Some kind relation between some kind phenomena were regarded as their study object, widely involved various fields such as action, economy, political, language, spirit, or even culture, sex, etc. All were shallow describe or subjective explain with various kinds of consciousness movement.
Latter, postmodernism came. It was not satisfied with the study result from its father, but its basic way was in fact nothing new, also regardless of the law, the truth. What more ridiculous was to try to explain the whole world or the common essence of the space with some kind special study result in some special fields.
Now, there are other phenomena in philosophy, it is to mix the philosophy with other kind subject knowledge, with its name as “xxxx philosophy”, such as language philosophy, science philosophy, political philosophy, social philosophy, life philosophy, mind philosophy, moral philosophy, art philosophy, history philosophy, economy philosophy, law philosophy, literature philosophy, education philosophy, women philosophy. Etc,
It seems every kind subject could be mixed with philosophy. What a mess situation for philosophy. It seems philosophy can not stand if without these special study field, It seems philosophy is not an independent study subject, it seems no place for philosophy to live independently. Obviously, philosophy is in chaos.
Now, we could see clearly the reason is because the philosophy continued the wrong way of the phenomenology. Regardless of the common law, the common value, the fundamental truth, ignoring the root basis behind the object or phenomena, thinking in the way not comply with the logic, producing various kinds of idea by various kinds of consciousness, with the theory disobey human’s common value and law, going far and far away from this practical world and human’s civilization.
Human’s history in 20th already could prove phenomenology’s mistake , the deduction and demonstration in my this paper also could prove phenomenology’s wrong.
So, now, it is high time to rethink the way of phenomenology, to criticize the phenomenology, to stop the wrong phenomenology study way. Let us target the correct study object for philosophy, go back to the correct way of philosophy, then, we could expect philosophy will go on well, help people better get to know the human world, resolve the practical problems in the world.