The Evolution of Husserl’s Semiotics

The Logical Investigations and its Revisions (1901-1914)

Bibliographic Data

ID6180453
AuthorsThomas Byrne (0000-0002-8809-3664, KU Leuven, corresponding author)
Year2018
Publication date2018-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueBulletin d Analyse Phénoménologique (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1782-2041
PublisherUniversity of Liege (PUBLISHER • BE)
DOI10.25518/1782-2041.1029
OpenAlexW2886789005
LanguageEN
Citations received5
References cited3

This paper offers a more comprehensive and accurate picture of Edmund Husserl’s semiotics. I not only clarify, as many have already done, Husserl’s theory of signs from the 1901 Logical Investigations, but also examine how he transforms that element of his philosophy in the 1913/14 Revisions to the Sixth Logical Investigation. Specifically, the paper examines the evolution of two central tenets of Husserl’s semiotics. I first look at how he modifies his classification of signs. I disclose why he revised his 1901 distinction between indicators and expressions, instead claiming in 1913/14 that the divisions should be drawn between indicators, signals, and categorial signs. Second, I elucidate why Husserl overturned his conclusion from the Investigations, that signs execute their signitive operations in three steps, because he recognizes that categorial signs and their meant object are experienced all at once. By exploring the transformation of these two tenets of Husserl’s semiotics, we will see that he conceived of the First Inves­tigation only as a starting or jumping off point for future analyses of signitive experience, rather than as his final account. This analysis will further reveal novel insights about Husserl’s understanding of intersubjectivity, passivity, and temporality

Epistemology · Intersubjectivity · Linguistics · Semiotics · Temporality · Origins and Evolution of Life · Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy · Philosophy · Philosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access