Despite retirement, Husserl gave several notable lectures. The first, at Paris in 1929,Edmund Husserl, Pariser Vorträge [1929], translated as The Paris Lectures (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 2d ed. 1967), by Peter Koestenbaum, with an "Introductory Essay" at ix–lxxvii. led to Méditations cartésiennes (Paris 1931).This work was published first in French. Husserl, Méditations cartésiennes (Paris: Armand Colin 1931), translated by Gabrielle Peiffer and Emmanuel Levinas. A German edition Cartesianische Meditationen (which Husserl had reworked) came out in 1950. Husserl here reviews the phenomenological epoché (or phenomenological reduction), presented earlier in his pivotal Ideen (1913), in terms of a further reduction of experience to what he calls a 'sphere of ownness.' From within this sphere, which Husserl enacts to show the impossibility of solipsism, the transcendental ego finds itself always already paired with the lived body of another ego, another monad. This 'a priori' interconnection of bodies, given in perception, is what founds the interconnection of consciousnesses known as transcendental intersubjectivity, which Husserl would go on to describe at length in volumes of unpublished writings. There has been a debate over whether or not Husserl's description of ownness and its movement into intersubjectivity is sufficient to reject the charge of solipsism, to which Descartes, for example, was subject. One argument against Husserl's description works this way: instead of infinity and the Deity being the ego's gateway to the Other, as in Descartes, Husserl's ego in the Cartesian Meditations itself becomes transcendent. It remains, however, alone (unconnected). Only the ego's grasp "by analogy" of the Other (e.g., by conjectural reciprocity) allows the possibility for an 'objective' intersubjectivity, and hence for community.Ricoeur, Paul (1967). Husserl. An Analysis of His Phenomenology. Northwestern University. pp. 82–85, 115–116, 123–142. Ricoeur wonders whether here Husserl does not "square the circle" regarding the issue of solipsism.
Despite retirement, Husserl gave several notable lectures The first, at Paris in 1929,Edmund Husserl, Pariser Vorträge [1929], translated as The Paris Lectures (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 2d ed. 1967), by Peter Koestenbaum, with an "Introductory Essay" at ix–lxxvii. led to Méditations cartésiennes (Paris 1931).This work was published first in French. Husserl, Méditations cartésiennes (Paris: Armand Colin 1931), translated by Gabrielle Peiffer and Emmanuel Levinas. A German edition Ca.rtesianische Meditationen (which Husserl had reworked) came out in 1950 Husserl here reviews the phenomenological epoché (or phenomenological reduction), presented earlier in his pivotal Ideen (1913), in terms of a further reduction of experience to what he calls a 'sp.here of ownness.' From within this sphere, which Husserl enacts to show the impossibility of solipsism, the transcendental ego finds itself always already paired with the lived body of another ego, another monad. This 'a priori' interconnection of bodies, given in perception, is what founds the interconnection of consciousnesses known as transcendental i.ntersubjectivity, which Husserl would go on to describe at length in volumes of unpublished writings. There has been a debate over whether or not Husserl's description of ownness and its movement into intersubjectivity is sufficient to reject the charge of solipsism, to which Descartes, for example, was subject. One argument against Husserl's description works this way: instead of infinity and the Deity being the ego's gateway to the Other, as in Descartes, Husserl's ego in the Cartesian Meditations itself becomes transcendent. It remains, however, alone (unconnected). Only the ego's grasp "by analogy" of the Other (eg., by conjectural reciprocity) allows the possibility for an 'objective' intersubjectivity, and hence for community.Ricoeur, Paul (1967). Husserl. An Analysis of His Phenomenology. Northwestern University. pp. 82–85, 115–116, 123–142. Ricoeur wonders whether here Husserl does not "square the circle" regarding the issue of solipsism.