Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    All modern thought, including phenomenology, must accept ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    All modern thought, including phenomenology, must accept the unthought as the ineliminable 'other' of man.

    Consciousness & MindSkepticism
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.The modern notion of man is constituted by an empirical dimension that exceeds pure consciousness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.No grounding in a transcendental subject can eliminate the empirical unthought, since that subject is itself modern and already includes the unthought.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Husserlian phenomenology does not posit a fully transparent self-coincident subject but already thematizes horizonal, pre-reflective, and passive syntheses beyond reflective grasp.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If phenomenology already incorporates structural incompleteness and horizon-structure, the 'unthought' is not an external other imposed upon it but an internal feature it explicitly theorizes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Foucault's claim therefore either redescribes phenomenological findings in archaeological language or misrepresents phenomenology as naively Cartesian, making the argument less a refutation than a relabeling.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Kant's distinction between the empirical and transcendental does not collapse them into a single 'modern man'—the transcendental analytic is not itself subject to empirical contamination by design.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the transcendental conditions of experience are not themselves empirical objects, then positing an ineliminable empirical 'unthought' does not infect the transcendental standpoint Foucault attributes to modern philosophy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The supporting argument conflates the historical emergence of the concept of man with a logical claim about the structure of transcendental justification, committing a genetic fallacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    SkepticismConsciousness & Mind

    Connections

    1 topic

    Personal Identity1 linked

    Related

    Foucault's claim therefore either redescribes phenomenological findings in archa...Husserlian phenomenology does not posit a fully transparent self-coincident subj...If phenomenology already incorporates structural incompleteness and horizon-stru...If the transcendental conditions of experience are not themselves empirical obje...
    +4 moreShow less
    Kant's distinction between the empirical and transcendental does not collapse th...No grounding in a transcendental subject can eliminate the empirical unthought, ...The modern notion of man is constituted by an empirical dimension that exceeds p...The supporting argument conflates the historical emergence of the concept of man...

    Similar

    Existential phenomenology (Sartre and Merleau-Ponty) does not resolve ...80%No grounding in a transcendental subject can eliminate the empirical u...75%The modern notion of man excludes Descartes' idea of the cogito as a '...73%Thought is no longer pure representation and cannot be separated from ...73%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: foucault
    View source passageHide passage
    It might seem that Husserl’s phenomenology has carried out the Kantian project of synthesizing man as object and as subject by radicalizing the Cartesian project; that is, by grounding our knowledge of empirical truths in the transcendental subject. The problem, however, is that, as Foucault sees it, the modern notion of man excludes Descartes’ idea of the cogito as a “sovereign transparency” of pure consciousness. Foucault’s key claim in the dense chapter 9, “Man and his doubles,” is that thoug
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit