Ion Copoeru

This paper aims to analyse an »original phenomenological scene«, which we are designating by the expression »the gallery of Dresden«, and which refers to the inclusion of an image in an other image, ad infinitum. The paper argues that the complex images are a pattern of the complexity of the noematic strata in the Husserlian phenomenology and that they are of a great importance for the phenomenological elucidation of objectuality and for the description of the structures of the »noematic sphere’ as dual-recessive structures.

The teaching of religion in public schools – whether the subject should or should not be included in the school curricula, what the content structure should be and which approach the teacher should adopt – led to various ethical dilemmas and conflicts in many regions of the world. Our article aims at reviewing, from the perspectives of numerous authors, the different topics as well as the ways in which aspects related to the impact of religious teaching and to specific approaches could be taught to economics students in a democratic society. At the same time, we underline different dilemmas and preoccupations resulting from religious values in the organizational management and in marketing, but also the synergies that could be capitalized from this standpoint, in order to obtain a competitive advantage in a context where diversity, and religious diversity in particular, is a reality that gets more and more obvious, while a good capitalization of it can bring forth loyalty in organizations and competitive advantages on the market.

The paper outlines Schutz’s phenomenology of law in the context of the transformation of positivistic practices in a post-totalitarian society. His major contribution is seen in the disentanglement of social phenomena from any form of naturalness by incorporating the dimension of meaning and interpretation into them. This philosophical gesture is made possible by renouncing any theory of transcendent ground(s) of a pre-formed order (Section 1) and leads to an interpretive concept of law, in which the reciprocity of perspectives play the major role. The conclusions are pointing toward a phenomenological concept of law able to take our freedom seriously.

(Introduction) The question of heterogeneity does not appear at first glance to be a genuinely phenomenological problem and not even a problem in general. It seems to go without saying that there is “coupling” (Paarung), association, fusion, synthesis or in general any form connection between different data of consciousness, all as it seems obvious (at least from Husserl) that there must be objectities so that we can talk about knowledge and truth. After Kant we got so used to synthetic formations that we hardly think of their possibilities in principle and the problems that these are called upon to resolve. Phenomenology does nothing else but describing the synthetic process, starting with its most elementary (pre-reflective) levels, aiming thus to completely elucidate the constitution of the objectity and, by that, the functioning and the rights of reason. Now, such elucidation does not only involve an approach aimed at the how, but also, the why of this process. In other words, our attention and our theoretical interest must be directed not only towards the course of the constitutive synthesis, but also on what motivates her intrinsically. Questions like "why should he be there in general an objectity? " or "is it principally possible to associate in one form or another data belonging to to the same class or to different classes? ”, questions which are de jure and which therefore refer rather to the legality of the constitution than its more or less contingent functioning, cannot in any way be excluded from the scope of the phenomenological questioning. As much as the epistemological ideal of phenomenological description required above all that it avoid any form of abstraction and idealization, this class of questions is, if not excluded, at least left in shadow.