Husserl on the “Horizon” of Objects

By: Jay

For Husserl, the perception of objects is necessarily inadequate due to what he and Merleau-Ponty describe as the “horizon.” This refers to the hiddenness of any object of perception due to a singular human vantage point and finitude. Any perception of an object can only be of a determined aspect or dimension of an object. If I perceive a table, the representational content given by the sensations will always contain an unknown. I cannot, even totaling up all the possible facts of an object and possible angles, perceive every aspect or relation within the object, as I always perceive from some determinate, singular perspective or vantage point.

It would, in fact, require omniscience to perceive an object in its totality. This being the case, Husserl speaks of the objects horizon, which is in fact ever-present and insurmountable.  This is the reason, then why perception of things is always necessarily inadequate. That requirement of omniscience is what Husserl means when he speaks of adequate perception as an ideal: It is something we cannot in actuality achieve.

Merleau-Ponty Destroys Psychologism and Pure Empricism

Phenomenologist Maurice Merleau-Ponty

By: Jay

   The first account Merleau-Ponty deals with in the selections from Phenomenology of Perception as found in Vision and Mind is the notion that sense-perception is identified with the object perceived. He believes that because of its presented immediacy, we mistakenly believe the two are the same, and they are not. One does not have the immediate sense impressions that do not have some context of prior meaning and experience which are bound up in the present experience. Such being the case, it is not “redness” that presents itself to me. There is no “pure sense impression.” We are seeking, then, meaning or essence.

     Merleau-Ponty deals with psychologists and empiricists and notes many of the classical criticisms that have been given of these views. There are numerous things necessary for interpreting sense impressions not immediately given, such as identity of objects or self over time, and therefore a strict empirical answer to this cannot be adequate.  Merleau-Ponty believes as well that psychology and the naïve psychologistic approach to perception cannot do without physiology (as well as philosophy), inasmuch as the body itself, as well as its spatio-temporal locale, is a key factor in the perception process.  Experience is not a frozen dot of time that we can abstract from all prior experience and analyze as uninterpreted brute factuality presenting itself to us. Indeed, the human subject, his past experiences, the intentional object, hic locale and context, and the essence of the thing in question all contribute  and are sufficient to refute bare empiricism, reductionism and psychologism.

A Funny Gestalt

Today in phenomenology of perception the good professor asked what we saw in this diagram:

 

My answer: 3 anti-semitic Pac-Men attacking.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 155 other followers