The Freedom of Thought
Patočka on Descartes and Husserl
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8410078 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Anita Williams (0000-0003-1224-4347, Murdoch University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 37-49 |
| Publication date | 2019-01-02 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0007-1773 • E-ISSN: 2332-0486 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/00071773.2018.1495814 |
| OpenAlex | W2902701818 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 8 |
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
Epistemology · Eastern European Communism and Reforms · Philosophy · Philosophy, Ethics, and Existentialism · Religious, Philosophical, and Educational Studies
| Highly cited | No |
|---|