I googled the phrase, and only got an essay on Stumpf, one I cannot read and which does not include the phrase in the freely available content.

I then looked at the SEP article for Stumpf, whom I had at least forgotten of the existence of.

extension and color form a concrete whole which can only be separated through abstraction. From this point of view, the concept of space, as any concept, draws upon its origin in sense perception and is, to use the Scholastic expression, an abstracta cum fundamento in re [abstraction with a basis in reality].

For Stumpf, do these "abstractions" exist, and can there be a phenomenology of them? How does Stumpf use 'phenomenology without phenomena'? Can there be a phenomenology, a study that uses the phenomenological method, into anything that is not phenomenal? According to either Stumpf or Husserl.

  • oh, let the dead bury the dead – user46524 Jun 22 at 19:26
  • 1
    Maybe I am missing something but isn't it the same in Husserl and other phenomenologists? You perform eidetic reduction on concrete intentional objects and you get eidoses or essences, which are the "abstractions". Then you perform founded intentional acts on the resulting essences, and they become your "phenomena". This is what Husserl is going over in much detail at the start of Ideas I. Of course, one suspends judgment on their "real existence", but this is no different from the original concrete objects. – Conifold Jun 22 at 21:10
  • it's so long since i read this, i guess that's pheomena for the transcendental ego, yes. cheers – user46524 Jun 22 at 21:58

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy