<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">In connection with the traditional principles of Bioethics, we wonder if they are able to make us understand the terminal patient and those who look after him and his family, or if it will be necessary to “go backwards” <italic>(Schritt zurück)</italic> - to speak in Heidegger’s terms- up to reach that unavoidable principle that guides and inspires the application of the others. The thought of Emmanuel Levinas can place us near an answer. In fact, he insists that it is the “other” in his <italic>face</italic> the one that it is imposed with its own strength, as a being essentially ethic and before its presence the only response is to recognize him/her as constitutively “indigent”. Precisely, before any other theory or any other argument, the “other” is presented to me face-to-face, his own presence is already existence of his acknowledgment, it is a call and a appeal to responsibility.Since Ethic demands primarily a complete dedication of all the person, that is to say a radical commitment of reason, will and feelings, we ask ourselves in front of these patients to get for them a new shelter. <italic>Serenity, availability, comforted mood</italic> among threats, <italic>patience, gratitude</italic> and <italic>hope</italic> may become founding virtues of interpersonal relationships (Bollnow).</abstract>

Towards an ethic of “Inescapable situations”

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Jan Patočka (1907-1977), Czech philosopher of world importance, wrote his habilitation script with Edmund Husserl in Freiburg, where he also became acquainted with the work of Martin Heidegger. In his own work, Patocka tried to resolve the philosophical conflict between their various concepts of phenomenology. The attempt to add a historical dimension to the notion of <italic>Lebenswelt</italic> and to the concept of phenomenon as such led him ultimately to formulate a phenomenological philosophy of history. In his last essay, which is the main subject of my lecture, Patočka sketches out a “history of the philosophy of the meaning of human life, beginning with Kant” and sets forth his own concept of the meaning of history, influenced by Heideggerian motifs. I present a concise interpretation of his idea and take a critical position towards it.</abstract>

Prolegómenos a uma fenomenologia do sentido da vida humana nos ensaios tardios de jan patočka

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">In this article the author presents Husserl’s analysis of the problem of time-consciousness in the C-Manuscripts (1929-1934). He tries to discuss the reasons why Husserl introduces the concept of “living present” and the necessity of distinguishing the originary temporalizing flux of absolute consciousness and the immanent time where acts are placed when they become object of an act of reflection. Another important issue is the introduction of a <italic>Ur-Ich,</italic> which works anonymously and temporalizes itself. It will be also studied why Husserl considers at the end that temporalization is an non-intentional passive process that works at the deepest level of consciousness.</abstract>

temporalidad e intencionalidad pasiva en los manuscritos C

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Among the main concepts of Michel Henry’s work, it was mostly the immanence concept that has brought more controversy and was Jess understood. It was determinant to <italic>Material Phenomenology,</italic> due to its radical innovation and it represents the key of its interpretation. To disclose this concept against its opponents means to become aware of the principle of transcendence - not discussed by Husserl and Heidegger - and to legitimate the objective knowledge, science and, at the same time, to oppose to the positivism. However, the main problem here is the inter-subjectivity. Instead of enclosure ego immanence, it enables relationships with others by creating the idea of «inter-immanence». The <italic>invisible</italic> itself is considered as a fundamental passivity of human subjectivity and of its essential pathos. Thus, the immanence concept is nothing else but self-affection.</abstract>

L’immanence en Question

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">The passivity is for many the key of Michel Henry’s phenomenology. Ricoeur, ‘Soi-même comme un autre’, recognizes that, in Henry’s work, passivity is a witness to alterity taking this concept out of ties of the speculative speech. On the other side, Marion being, however, aware of it, as stated in his essay ‘La chair ou la donation de soi’ argues that essence ‘sentante’ is prior to ‘l’épreuve de soi’.I’ll try to disclose further in this work that essence ‘sentante’ is the passivity itself. Thus more than witnessing (Ricoeur) or appropriating (Marion), the others and the limits are data of affective life in three passivity levels, ranging from sensations, feelings and affections.</abstract>

O Outro e o limite na propriedade de Si

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">By describing body as original power identical to transcendentallife of ego, in accordance with radical or material phenomenology, we can establish that the phenomenological truth of a bodily subjectivity is the immanence of pure self-affection.From the perspective of Michel Henry’s view, the Maine Biran and Kandinsky’s analyses show clearly that body potentiality unveils pathos linked with the entire universe and turn it into a living cosmos. This cosmic life, visible in art in general and abstract art in particular, makes us aware that this subjective reality is similar to our own inner strength, as we can clearly demonstrate it by the movement of our hand. Thus, the body itself has access to the world without being reduced to a mere instrument or transcendental mean extraneous to our innermost life.</abstract>

Mouvement sensible et corps originaire

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">In this contribution, the relationship between work and leisure is investigated from a phenomenological viewpoint. The insights of Michel Henry and his interpretations of the work of Karl Marx are prominent. Marx makes a distinction between objective and subjective work. It is especially the second sphere, on which Henry elaborates his phenomenology of the living body, as experience of life itself. Work is the mode of <italic>pathos.</italic> After this introduction, the question of the phenomenology of leisure is being posed. The phenomenological zero-point of leisure is the night, in which we sleep. The invisibility in the night is the starting point to reveal the essence of leisure. The phenomenological mode of night, rest, is sleep. Further, in this line, the problem of vacation, time spending on not-working as obsession is of importance for our society today. From the point of view of henriana phenomenology, some notable conclusion can be formulated.</abstract>

Travail et loisir

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">We would like to conduct a phenomenological analysis of illness beyond the characteristics which define it scientifically, in order to consider the suffering experience of the sick person which, in reality, constitute its authentic truth. Following Michel Henry’s philosophy which defines life as pathetic self-affection, we will understand that illness may and must first of all be considered as an intense form of this unsurmountable link to one’s self which concerns the very essence of everyone of us as a living ipseity. Then, if <italic>“One does not feel”,</italic> if suffering is always a founding individual experience, the principle that medicine should be attentive to the subjective experience of patients is consequently established. Then we can also begin to understand the enigma of a patient’s attachment to his illness, to the point of refusing to be cured, as an inappropriate existential expression of an ontological fear of losing oneself.</abstract>

Maladie: de la phénomenologie a la thérapie

Fenomenologia não Intencional: Tarefa para uma Fenomenologia Futura

O Começo Cartesiano e a Ideia de Fenomenologia

O Conceito de Ser enquanto produção

AHEAD OF PRINT

Volume 36 (2023): Issue 1 (December 2023)

Volume 35 (2023): Issue 1 (May 2023)

Volume 34 (2022): Issue 1 (December 2022)

Volume 33 (2022): Issue 1 (September 2022)

Volume 32 (2021): Issue 1 (December 2021)

Volume 31 (2021): Issue 1 (October 2021)

Volume 30 (2020): Issue 1 (December 2020)

Volume 29 (2019): Issue 1 (December 2019)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 1 (October 2018)

Volume 27 (2018): Issue 1 (April 2018)

Volume 26 (2017): Issue 1 (October 2017)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 1 (October 2012)

Volume 24 (2012): Issue 1 (April 2012)

Volume 22-23 (2011): Issue 1 (October 2011)

Volume 20-21 (2010): Issue 1 (October 2010)

Volume 18-19 (2009): Issue 1 (October 2009)

Volume 16-17 (2008): Issue 1 (October 2008)

Volume 15 (2008): Issue 1 (April 2008)

Volume 14 (2007): Issue 1 (April 2007)

Volume 13 (2007): Issue 1 (October 2007)

Volume 12 (2006): Issue 1 (October 2006)

Volume 11 (2006): Issue 1 (April 2006)

Volume 10 (2005): Issue 1 (October 2005)

Volume 9 (2004): Issue 1 (October 2004)

Volume 8 (2004): Issue 1 (April 2004)

Volume 7 (2003): Issue 1 (October 2003)

Volume 5-6 (2003): Issue 1 (April 2003)

Volume 4 (2002): Issue 1 (October 2002)

Volume 3 (2001): Issue 1 (October 2001)

Volume 2 (2001): Issue 1 (April 2001)

Volume 1 (2000): Issue 1 (October 2000)

Phainomenon

Phainomenon is an international journal specializing in phenomenology.  It was founded in 2000 and has been published since then with the support of the Center of Philosophy of the University of Lisbon, Portugal.  Phainomenon seeks to contribute to the development of phenomenological studies worldwide, stimulating original work in all fields of phenomenological research, as well as in the areas where phenomenology crosses paths with other philosophical traditions and scientific domains. Phainomenon also seeks to contribute to a better cognizance and understanding of the phenomenological tradition – both of its authors and its themes – accepting works that advance our comprehension of it.  Phainomenon publishes works in English (recommended), Portuguese, Spanish, French, Italian, and German. Contributions are accepted following a double or single-blind peer review process, always with external reviewers.  The current publisher of Phainomenon is SCIENDO, which belongs to De Gruyter Verlag,  Regularly, the journal has two sections: a general section, where papers are continuously received and published; and a thematic section, preceded by an announcement and a call for papers, sometimes under the responsibility of guest editors. The thematic section usually has a comprehensive theme, intended to encompass other philosophical traditions, as well as other disciplines belonging either to the social and human sciences or to the natural sciences.  Moreover, Phainomenon publishes book reviews and bibliographical notes and, though not on a regular basis, translations into Portuguese of fundamental texts belonging to the intellectual patrimony of phenomenology. Phainomenon is published twice a year, in Spring and Fall. All articles, notes, translations, reviews and other content can be accessed and downloaded for free thanks to our open access policy.  Phainomenon is financed through Portuguese national funds through FCT - Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P., in the scope of the project UIDP/00310/2020.  ArchivingSciendo archives the contents of this journal in Portico - digital long-term preservation service of scholarly books, journals and collections.  Plagiarism Policy  The editorial board is participating in a growing community of Similarity Check System's users in order to ensure that the content published is original and trustworthy. Similarity Check is a medium that allows for comprehensive manuscripts screening, aimed to eliminate plagiarism and provide a high standard and quality peer-review process.  Journal SponsorshipCentro de Filosofia da Universidade de LisboaFacultade de Letras da Universidade de LisboaFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia - Portugal 