Next: About this document ...
Up: Phil. 190Efinal_paper, Winter 11
Previous: Instructions
- Pick an issue which Husserl discusses in our readings from the
Logical Investigations and explain how and why his view has
changed, and how it hasn't, by the time of the Ideas. Are
there subtle changes one might miss? Or: are there hidden
continuities? (Either of those would be especially interesting.) Do
changes in terminology obscure the issue? If so try to untangle
them.
- Pick some aspect of Husserl's views (in the Logical
Investigations, the Ideas, or both) which seems to be
wrong or confused. Explain why it seems wrong or confused. Then,
explain how Husserl would defend it. (Note: there obviously might be
objections against which Husserl would have no defense, or no good
defense. This topic suggests not writing about those, but rather
about the ones Husserl could meet. On the other hand, the objection
had better be serious, or Husserl's response will not be
interesting.)
- Explain how Husserl intends to solve one or more of the
epistemological problems we saw in Hume. Explain what Husserl thinks
is right in Hume, and where he thinks Hume goes wrong (note: you may
need to make some educated guesses about how Husserl would interpret
Hume). (You could also use other passages in Hume, or do this with a
different philosopher, if you feel you have enough
background--e.g., Kant or Descartes.)
Next: About this document ...
Up: Phil. 190Efinal_paper, Winter 11
Previous: Instructions
Abe Stone
2011-03-01