Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Intuition Pumping on Meillassoux

I have been thinking about addressing Meillassoux's correlationism critique, and addressing the challenge specifically to phenomenology. Below are some links I've been reading on this, though no serious philosophical reflection can commence until I get several book reviews done.

This is the best blog post I can find on the subject.

Somehow, I think Meillassoux's want for a realism of the "ancestral realm" guilty of the natural attitude (this is my prima facie intuition about depictions of his arguments, the best being Cogburn's articulation). By my understanding, speculative realists want a realism from the perspective of objects beyond or independent of being given, or mediated. The point of phenomenological givenness is to keep in view the co-relational structure and the fact that subjectivity is an experience of our constituting acts and the constituted world. A wholly independent perspective from an impartial and impersonal viewpoint loses sight of subjectivity (Husserl's term for this perspective is the natural attitude) and as long as we want to start with how we experience the world, what would the impetus for metaphysics achieve in retrieving the sense of the philosophical view from nowhere that characterized Western thought prior to Kant? It seems proponents of SR are just reaching back for something lost. In this way, I do not think SR adds anything new to philosophy.

I'll have more to say on this in the near future perhaps.

I have yet to really penetrate Meillassoux, as I have been buying books on Scheler left and right so be patient with just my intuition pumping for now.

Of course, there are very naive and enthusiastic pronouncements of Meillassoux that uncritically denounce phenomenology.

Of all the papers on this topic, I think Paul Ennis' paper a good representation of reading Meillassoux. You can find that paper here. 

For now, I would like general discussion about what you might think about correlationism.

4 comments:

Robert Bond said...

Thank you for your blog, which I read regularly. I'm sorry to respond to this post thoroughly tangentially, but I wonder what books on Scheler you have been buying? I have been looking for (introductory & contemporary) studies of Scheler on Amazon, and can't find all that many. Any recommendations for reading on Scheler (perhaps particularly in relation to his concept of empathy/sympathy) would be much appreciated!

Carbondale Chasmite said...

Manfred Frings wrote "The Mind of Max Scheler." That's the best introductory text I can think of. The worst book on Scheler in English is probably Francis Dunlop's book; I'd avoid it.

Two colleagues of mine have also written the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Entry which is free. It's pretty good, and in every SEP entry there is an extended bibliography you can explore on your own.

Carbondale Chasmite said...

Come to think of it. The Mind of Max Scheler is good, but I misquoted myself--a better introduction is M. S. Fring's "Max Scheler: A Concise Guide to yada yada." It's published with Marquette University Press.

Robert Bond said...

Many thanks.