Books by Anita Williams
This book revisits psychology’s appropriation of natural scientific methods. The author argues th... more This book revisits psychology’s appropriation of natural scientific methods. The author argues that, in order to overcome ongoing methodological debates in psychology, it is necessary to confront the problem of formalisation contained in the appropriation of methods of natural science. By doing so, the subject matter of psychology – the human being – and questions about the meaning of human existence can be brought to the centre of the discipline. Following the work of Garfinkel, Sacks, Edwards and Potter, the author engages with ethnomethodologically informed qualitative methods, which originally stem from phenomenology, as a possible alternative to statistical methods, but ultimately finds these methods to be just another method of formalisation. She returns to Husserlian phenomenology as a way to critique the centrality of method in psychology and shows that the adoption of natural scientific methods in psychology is part of the larger push to formalise and objectify all aspects of human existence.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
This edited volume highlights the continued relevance of Husserl’s phenomenology, through a selec... more This edited volume highlights the continued relevance of Husserl’s phenomenology, through a selection of work from the members of the Organization of Phenomenological Organization. As their papers amply demonstrate, contemporary phenomenology retains its critical focus, even as the discipline continues to expand and diversify. The book consists of four sections. In the first, authors focus on the contemporary implications of Husserl’s critique of natural science and the problem of meaning; in the second, they draw upon phenomenological insights to help us understand contemporary present-day social and ecological crises. The third includes contributions on the relationships between phenomenology, hermeneutics, literature and art; while in the final section, authors take up the work of prominent post-Husserlian phenomenologists to think through issues of language, interpretation, philosophy, religion and the history of ideas. In sum, the variety of approaches these thinkers take in order to understand issues that currently confront us richly demonstrates the enduring significance of Husserlian phenomenology for 20th- and 21st-century philosophy.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Edited Collection of papers
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Papers by Anita Williams
Patočka highlights the central role of Cartesianism in our tradition of thinking. Yet, today, bra... more Patočka highlights the central role of Cartesianism in our tradition of thinking. Yet, today, brain scientists often claim to have overcome Cartesian dualism. In this paper, I argue that the Cartesian conceptions of human nature and sensory perception remain presuppositions of brain science, where perception is largely equated with thinking. Equating perception and thinking means that thinking is a determined process, which leads to an erosion of critique. Critique, and the freedom of thought it entails, is essential to Descartes, Husserl and Patočka. I examine the differences, as well as the relationship, between Descartes method of doubt, Husserl’s phenomenological epochē and Patočka’s universalization of the epochē. I also show how Descartes’, Husserl’s and Patočka’s way into critique present different ways to understand self, things and the world. In conclusion, I suggest that Patočka presents a promising way to critique mechanistic understandings of thinking by rethinking both subject and object.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Phenomenology and the Problem of Meaning in Human Life and History, 2017
In this paper, I outline Patočka’s critique of Husserl’s epochē in order to highlight a differenc... more In this paper, I outline Patočka’s critique of Husserl’s epochē in order to highlight a difference between two ways of being engaged in thought. Patočka critiques Husserl’s limit to the epochē, suggesting that the self-positing ego is not a natural limit. Patočka argues that we can universalise the epochē and question any thesis whatsoever: theses concerning both self and world. Patočka’s universalisation of Husserl’s epochē bares certain similarities to Plato’s noesis. To clarify Patočka’s understanding of the epochē, I will outline Plato’s distinction between dianoia and noesis. I will conclude that Patočka’s insights regarding Husserl’s epochē as well as Plato’s philosophy give us another way to think about the relation between modern scientific thinking and philosophical thinking.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Martin Heidegger, Jan Patočka and Jacob Klein follow Edmund Husserl’s inter-est in the origins of... more Martin Heidegger, Jan Patočka and Jacob Klein follow Edmund Husserl’s inter-est in the origins of geometry as well as philosophy. Like Husserl, Heidegger, Patočka and Klein see modern science as defined by a shift in our understanding of the mathematical and its relation to the world. Modern mathematical science takes mathematical thinking as the way to understand the world because nature is mathematical: hence, understanding the mathematical is crucial for clarifying our current way of thinking. My paper will focus on the way Heidegger and Patočka extend Husserl’s analysis of the mathematical character of modern sci-ence as well as the origin of geometry.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
In this paper, I argue that Husserl’s critique of formalism remains relevant to psychological mod... more In this paper, I argue that Husserl’s critique of formalism remains relevant to psychological models of perception. In particular, I focus on the neurocognitive model of perception to show that, on this model, sense is reduced to sensation and human sense-making is confined to the end point of a causal process. By contrast, Husserl’s explanation of human perception reinvigorates a meaningful concept of sense. Husserl explicates that the act of perception is comprised of two aspects: sensuous and categorial intuition. For Husserl, sensuous intuition means that we reach the object of perception without mediation, while categorial intuition means that we understand what we see, can see the same thing differently and can place it in relation to other things. By using Husserl’s concepts of both sensuous and categorial intuition, I question the neurocognitive model of perception. Sensuous intuition brings into question the assumption that we are met with sense-data, and categorical intuition brings into question our enchainment to the given, implied by the causal model of perception. In short, for Husserl, sense is not mere sensation, but is constitutive of our meaningful engagement with the world: our understanding of the world is not passively determined by the world external to us; rather, we make sense of the world around us.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Self-responsibility and self-critique have been themes in philosophy since Plato’s Socrates endor... more Self-responsibility and self-critique have been themes in philosophy since Plato’s Socrates endorsed the demand to ‘know thyself’ [γνωθι σαυτον].In the modern philosophical tradition, self-critical reason, a reason that gives the law to itself, has been at the very centre of the practice of both epistemology and ethics. In the 20th century, the European phenomenological philosophers Edmund Husserl and Jan Patočka brought new clarity and a sense of urgency to the critical thinking surrounding the need for responsibility. Using Husserl’s and Patočka’s thinking as the starting point for a critical reflection, this volume proposes different approaches to reflect upon the increasing formalisation of all aspects of our lives, which is particularly relevant for the present age.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Phenomenology is a mode of philosophising that does not take ready-made theses for its premises b... more Phenomenology is a mode of philosophising that does not take ready-made theses for its premises but rather keeps all premises at an arm’s length. It turns from sclerotic theses to the living well-spring of experience. Its opposite is metaphysics – which constructs philosophy as a special scientific system. Phenomenology examines the experiential content of such theses; in every abstract thought it seeks to uncover what is hidden in it, how we arrive at it, what seen and lived reality underlies it. We are uncovering something that has been here all along, something we had sensed, glimpsed from the corner of our eye but did not fully know, something that ‘had not been brought to conception.’ Phenomenon – that which presents itself; logos – meaningful discourse. Only by speaking it out do we know something fully, only what we speak out do we fully see. That is what makes phenomenology so persuasive.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
New technologies, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and transcranial magnetic ... more New technologies, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), are currently touted as, not only giving us a better picture of the structure of the brain, but also a better understanding of our thinking. As Alan Snyder demonstrates when he claims his aim is to understand the ‘architecture of thought’ by investigating the brain. Against this backdrop, I will argue that new technologies present a worrying extension of mathematical natural science into the domain of human affairs. Ex-trapolating upon Heidegger, I will put forward that neuroscientific experiments force thinking to conform to the mathematical conception of nature, rather than reveal something about the ‘true’ nature of our thinking. In a time when the expansion of mathematical natural science threatens to reduce every domain to that which is quantifiable, I will conclude by suggesting that the responsibility of the philosopher is to question the presuppositions of modern science and psychology.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
My paper is an attempt to reflect upon the claim that the brain can think. Neuroimaging technolog... more My paper is an attempt to reflect upon the claim that the brain can think. Neuroimaging technology has led to an increased acceptance of the claim that the brain thinks because we can supposedly “observe” the “brain in action”. Although the more outrageous claims made by neuroscientists are critiqued by colleagues in the field, what is not addressed is the problematic reduction of human thinking to the material brain. Drawing upon Husserl’s discussion of categorial intuition and his
critique of psychologism, I will argue that thinking requires far more than an individual material brain. I will conclude by suggesting that taking responsibility for one’s claims requires more than a critical interpretation of results: it requires one to question the presuppositions upon which research is based.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The Perth workshop “Judgement, Responsibility and the Life-World” aimed to address a philosophica... more The Perth workshop “Judgement, Responsibility and the Life-World” aimed to address a philosophical account of the nature of self-responsibility as a critical, self-reflective and ethical
practice which is required to correct the increasingly value-free formalism of knowledge. The idea was to base his concept of self-responsibility on the critical analyses of the philosophical
contributions of Edmund Husserl and Jan Patočka, both of whom argued that the idea of self-responsibility must take into account the notion of the “life-world” (Lebenswelt), the world in
which we live. The point is to argue that both Husserl’s and Patočka’s visions represent a startlingly modern and relevant assessment of the current critical situation of our technologically advanced but morally challenged and unevenly developed human culture.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Husserl’s critique of using the natural scientific method to investigate meaningful human experie... more Husserl’s critique of using the natural scientific method to investigate meaningful human experience remains relevant to recent debates in psychology. Discursive Psychology (DP) claims to draw upon phenomenological insights to criticize quantitative psychology for studying formal theoretical concepts rather than the actual practices of the lived social world. In this paper, I will argue that DP overlooks the important distinction that can be made between the theoretical attitude and the natural scientific attitude in Husserlian Phenomenology and hence, once again, loses sight of the meaningfully constituted life-world. In doing so, I will demonstrate the continued relevance of Husserl’s critique of natural science to the discipline of psychology.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
In recent years increasing media attention has highlighted the possibility that antidepressants m... more In recent years increasing media attention has highlighted the possibility that antidepressants may cause many disturbing side effects, including suicide. However, coverage of these issues has been criticised as negatively affecting people who suffer from depression. Employing the methods of discursive psychology, this paper examines how arguments are constructed for and against providing information about the full range of side effects of antidepressant medications, via the analysis of a public debate in which the potential side effects of SSRIs were the topic of concern. We demonstrate how one speaker draws on repertoires of consumer rights pitted against corporate profit motives to construct a case for the provision of warnings as a reasonable and obvious responsibility of pharmaceutical companies. The other speaker relies on separating practical from academic problems, and constructs the ‘academic’ question of serious side effects of SSRIs as a contentious and illegitimate concern in the public realm. The arguments employed by both opponents are discussed in terms of their rhetorical construction and social consequences.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Conference Proceedings by Anita Williams
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Book Reviews by Anita Williams
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Books by Anita Williams
Papers by Anita Williams
critique of psychologism, I will argue that thinking requires far more than an individual material brain. I will conclude by suggesting that taking responsibility for one’s claims requires more than a critical interpretation of results: it requires one to question the presuppositions upon which research is based.
practice which is required to correct the increasingly value-free formalism of knowledge. The idea was to base his concept of self-responsibility on the critical analyses of the philosophical
contributions of Edmund Husserl and Jan Patočka, both of whom argued that the idea of self-responsibility must take into account the notion of the “life-world” (Lebenswelt), the world in
which we live. The point is to argue that both Husserl’s and Patočka’s visions represent a startlingly modern and relevant assessment of the current critical situation of our technologically advanced but morally challenged and unevenly developed human culture.
Conference Proceedings by Anita Williams
Book Reviews by Anita Williams
critique of psychologism, I will argue that thinking requires far more than an individual material brain. I will conclude by suggesting that taking responsibility for one’s claims requires more than a critical interpretation of results: it requires one to question the presuppositions upon which research is based.
practice which is required to correct the increasingly value-free formalism of knowledge. The idea was to base his concept of self-responsibility on the critical analyses of the philosophical
contributions of Edmund Husserl and Jan Patočka, both of whom argued that the idea of self-responsibility must take into account the notion of the “life-world” (Lebenswelt), the world in
which we live. The point is to argue that both Husserl’s and Patočka’s visions represent a startlingly modern and relevant assessment of the current critical situation of our technologically advanced but morally challenged and unevenly developed human culture.