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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Husserl's account of hearing-oneself-speak as immediate self-proximity is undermined by his own description of temporalization.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Husserl claims that hearing-oneself-speak involves no external detour — the hearing and speaking are self-proximate and immediate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Husserl's own account of the living present requires retention, which introduces a non-present, non-perceptual element into the present moment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the living present contains an internal difference (the fold of retention), then the moment of hearing-oneself-speak cannot be purely immediate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Husserl's protention-retention structure requires that any 'now' moment already contains traces of the just-past and anticipations of the about-to-come.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A self-presence constituted through temporal flow cannot be simple or punctual — it is internally differentiated by the very structure enabling it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, the 'now' of hearing-oneself-speak is never a pure coincidence of emission and reception but a synthesis across temporal difference.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Husserl in 'On the Phenomenology of the Internal Time-Consciousness' acknowledges that retention is not re-presentation but a genuine modification of the primal impression.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If retention modifies rather than merely copies the primal impression, then the living present is constitutively altered by non-presence from within.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Merleau-Ponty's account of the temporal chiasm similarly confirms that self-presence is never immediate but always mediated by the flesh of time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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