[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 18 KB, 336x263, 1586456472462.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15223161 No.15223161 [Reply] [Original]

I'm reading Being and Nothingness at the moment, and I'm really enjoying it. Is Phenomenology of Perception a good place to go to after this one? I'd like to get into other phenomenologist writings that were roughly contemporaneous with Sartre

>> No.15223208

MP is good but is hard, some sec lit could help a bit.
imo Derrida is the one to go after finishing Heidegger but Levinas is just as good if not better

>> No.15223223
File: 148 KB, 900x1200, 1538361863585.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15223223

>>15223208
Could I hop from B&N to Derrida's On Phenomenology? I know he heavily reacts the the metaphysics underlying Husserl's work so I'm not sure if 800 pages of Sartre is enough of a preparation. I am decently familiar with Baudrillard and Deleuze + Guattari's works, if that would help me?

>> No.15223252

>>15223223
honestly i have not read Sartre and the only people who i know only refer to him for his Critique of Dialectical Reason but
as far as i know Derrida was critical of Sartre for his "foundational" ontological project which he rejected it.
On the question of his contemporaries all i could say is that Derrida is his own animal and contextualizing doesn't make much sense, at least to me, i could be wrong of course.

>> No.15223327
File: 40 KB, 412x550, 1579199897857.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15223327

>>15223252
either way thanks anon

>> No.15223518

>>15223161
Have a bump OP

>> No.15223749
File: 49 KB, 580x750, 4292c3a7e3072961dda5661cbf1b3070-imagejpeg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
15223749

>>15223223
MP is amazing. Reading Part One of his Phenomenology of Perception obliterated my representationalist thinking. You should consider reading Husserl & Kant before him though.

>>15223208
Like this anon said, the writing can be quite difficult. The secondary lit really helps though. Though Hubert Dreyfus' gets Merleau-Ponty heroically wrong regarding rational concepts, I really recommend you read his article on skill acquisition through MP.
See Dreyfus, H.:Intelligence without Representation—Merleau-Ponty's Critique of Mental Representation: The Relevance of Phenomenology to Scientific Explanation.

Then IMMEDIATELY follow that reading with J. C. Berendzen's article: Coping Without Foundations: On Dreyfus’s Use of Merleau‐Ponty.

I can't stress how helpful these have been to wrap my head around the subject.

>> No.15223840

>>15223749
Thanks for the recs anon. Is it hard in the way post structuralism is hard to read? Dense/abstruse writing isn't necessarily an issue, I'm more concerned about making sure I've got a good background. Would Husserl's Paris Lectures make for a decent backing in addition to your articles? They seem to be considered as a good overview of his thought.