I just looked this up and maybe I'm misunderstanding but it seems to start off simple like "Studying subjective experiences" and then descends into a bunch of nonsense that isn't really necessary to be saying in the first place.
A second use of “phenomenology” common in contemporary philosophy names a property of some mental states, the property they have if and only if there is something it is like to be in them. Thus, it is sometimes said that emotional states have a phenomenology while belief states do not. For example, while there is something it is like to be angry, there is nothing it is like to believe that Paris is in France.
Like this is a ridiculously drawn out and nonsensical way to just say "Emotions are experienced differently than one experiences beliefs about the outside world", holy shit I hate philosophers.
ngl that second definition is weird af and really simplifies but also confuses what phenomenology is. Even Wiki has better definitions:
For G. W. F. Hegel, phenomenology is a philosophical (philosophischen) and scientific (wissenschaftliche) study of phenomena (what presents itself to us in conscious experience) as a means to finally grasp the absolute, logical, ontological and metaphysical Spirit (Absolute Spirit) that is essential to phenomena. This has been called dialectical phenomenology (see Hegelian dialectic).[10]
For Edmund Husserl, phenomenology is "the reflective study of the essence of consciousness as experienced from the first-person point of view."[11] Phenomenology takes the intuitive experience of phenomena (whatever presents itself in phenomenological reflexion) as its starting point and tries to extract from it the essential features of experiences and the essence of what we experience. When generalized to the essential features of any possible experience, this has been called transcendental phenomenology (see Varieties).[12] Husserl's view was based on aspects of the work of Franz Brentano and was developed further by philosophers such as Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Max Scheler, Edith Stein, Dietrich von Hildebrand and Emmanuel Levinas.
tbh, the only interesting work I have (partially) read on the second definition is Ahmed's Queer Phenomenology, which has an interesting section critiquing Husserl's imagined table as divorced from material and domestic reality and she ties in Marx and Derrida on commodity fetishism to do it. But that's more affect and queer theory stuff than phenomenology "proper".
I literally don't understand any of Hegel, or what the fuck his form of phenomenology is or how it is useful. Respect to Marx for even understanding it lmao
I just looked this up and maybe I'm misunderstanding but it seems to start off simple like "Studying subjective experiences" and then descends into a bunch of nonsense that isn't really necessary to be saying in the first place.
Like this is a ridiculously drawn out and nonsensical way to just say "Emotions are experienced differently than one experiences beliefs about the outside world", holy shit I hate philosophers.
deleted by creator
ngl that second definition is weird af and really simplifies but also confuses what phenomenology is. Even Wiki has better definitions:
tbh, the only interesting work I have (partially) read on the second definition is Ahmed's Queer Phenomenology, which has an interesting section critiquing Husserl's imagined table as divorced from material and domestic reality and she ties in Marx and Derrida on commodity fetishism to do it. But that's more affect and queer theory stuff than phenomenology "proper".
I literally don't understand any of Hegel, or what the fuck his form of phenomenology is or how it is useful. Respect to Marx for even understanding it lmao
deleted by creator