<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<p>The discrimination between two points of view, or perspectives, in respect to consciousness, one on the first-person other on the third-person, deals with two concepts of consciousness- respectively, phenomenal consciousness and intentional consciousness (sections 1 and 2). I will accept, generally, this idea. However, I will argue that are not two, but three kinds of consciousness and typ of experience, making my point introducing the concept of different characters of experience (section 3). These characters are ‘experience’, ‘signification’ and ‘reference/object’, and when all of them occur I say that we have an intentional experience. If it lacks the last one, we have a meaningful experience, but without reference. Finally, if the only occurrence is ‘experience’, then the type of experience we live is a meaningless or mute experience. This ‘taxonomy’ allows classifying a perceptum as an intentional experience, a quale as a meaningful experience and a sense datum as a mute experience. On the other hand, it represents, as I claim, an approach much more clear, than those usually appears, to the question ‘what qualia really are? ‘ (sections 4 e 5). Moreover: it makes possible talk about objectivity of qualia, an objectivity without object (section 6).</p>
</abstract>

Caracteres da experiência

Uma historia aromática em bagdade

Da certeza: Husserl e Wittgenstein

<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<p>Every philosophy has a conceptualisation which demarcares it and defines a net of signification, even in the field of filiation or proximity relations. Ricœur’s hermeneutics is admittedly close to Gadamer’s hermeneutics, due to the aim of integrating and rectifying it and to its identical or equivalent conceptualisation (in some cases). My topic concerns the <italic>difference</italic> between the two hermeneutics, which mainly emerges through the relevance attached to dialogue. The chief question I ask is whether that difference is insignificant and sporadic or, in contrast, is determinant to the description of Ricœur’s hermeneutics, which would mark it out against Gadamer’s. The former establishes a link between dialogue and oralism, which allow us a coherent understanding of not only his opposition to romantic hermeneutics, but also the development of his epistemological project. By analysing these matters we will, therefore, realise the consistency of the hermeneutic paradigm put forward by Ricœur, as well as the progressively clear cut between the two hermeneutical models.</p>
</abstract>

Paul Ricœur: A Recusa do modelo dialogal na hermenêutica

A dúvida de Descartes e a substância aristotélica

Book Review: LÉVY, BERNARD-HENRI, <italic>Le Siècle de Sartre,</italic> Ed. Bernard Grasset, Paris, 2000

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 