Anthony Hatzimoysis

This paper examines the link between Immanuel Kant’s notion of transcendental self-consciousness and Dan Zahavi’s notion of pre-reflective self-consciousness in order to address the problem of reflection. Zahavi emphasizes the identity in pre-reflective self-consciousness, according to which the subject is conscious of itself as the one undergoing an experience, that is the ‘for-me-ness’ of experience. Reflection marks a difference between the subject and its experience, objectifying the experience. The problem of reflection has to do with how the identity in pre-reflective self-consciousness makes possible a difference in reflection. The preliminary solution Zahavi gives is to consider pre-reflective self-consciousness as internally differentiated. However, a more systematic account is needed. We turn to Kant and adopt a first-order reading of transcendental self-consciousness, according to which self-consciousness is intrinsic to the act of synthesis rather than a second-order consciousness of it. Transcendental self-consciousness is a formal givenness—an immediate, non-objectifying mode through which I am conscious of myself. We argue that Kant’s distinction between transcendental self-consciousness and the self-consciousness of the intuitive understanding offers resources to solve the problem. Transcendental self-consciousness is outward while the self-consciousness of the intuitive understanding is inward. The outwardness of transcendental self-consciousness amounts to its self-enlargement, accounting for the internal differentiation of pre-reflective self-consciousness. The proposed solution not only clarifies the transition from pre-reflective self-consciousness to reflection but also underscores the relevance of Kantian insights for phenomenological discussions on subjectivity

Playwright, novelist, political theorist, literary critic and philosopher, Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-80) remains an iconic figure. This book examines his philosophical ideas and methods. It is an introductory guide for the student who wishes to understand Sartre's philosophical argumentation. It reconstructs in plain language key instances of Sartre's philosophical reasoning at work and shows how certain questions arise for Sartre and what philosophical tools he uses to address those questions. Each chapter considers a range of issues in the Sartrean corpus including his conception of phenomenology, the question of self-identity, the Sartrean view of conscious beings, his understanding of the self, his theory of value, human action as both the originator and the outcome of social processes, dialectical reason, and his conception of artistic activity. Hatzimoysis uncovers the philosophical argumentation, identifies Sartre's most important philosophical ideas and addresses the arguments in which those ideas are employed. Readers are able to get a real understanding of Sartre's approach to the activity of philosophising and how his method favours certain types of philosophical analysis.

Playwright, novelist, political theorist, literary critic and philosopher, Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-80) remains an iconic figure. This book examines his philosophical ideas and methods. It is an introductory guide for the student who wishes to understand Sartre's philosophical argumentation. It reconstructs in plain language key instances of Sartre's philosophical reasoning at work and shows how certain questions arise for Sartre and what philosophical tools he uses to address those questions. Each chapter considers a range of issues in the Sartrean corpus including his conception of phenomenology, the question of self-identity, the Sartrean view of conscious beings, his understanding of the self, his theory of value, human action as both the originator and the outcome of social processes, dialectical reason, and his conception of artistic activity. Hatzimoysis uncovers the philosophical argumentation, identifies Sartre's most important philosophical ideas and addresses the arguments in which those ideas are employed. Readers are able to get a real understanding of Sartre's approach to the activity of philosophising and how his method favours certain types of philosophical analysis.

If emotion is not an arbitrary compilation of fixed types of (descriptive, conceptual, conative, prescriptive) content, nor a state that can be reduced to other types of pre-existing (perceptual, cognitive, behavioral) states, then what sort of thing is it really? Tom Cochrane has proposed that emotions are valent representations of situated concerns. Valent representation is a type of mental content whose function is to detect the presence or absence of certain conditions; what makes that type of content valent is that without needing the mediation of any other state, a response is triggered that is disposed to increase or decrease the presence of the condition represented. I raise doubts about the plausibility of that account in light of recent work in philosophy of biology and philosophy of mind.

Playwright, novelist, political theorist, literary critic and philosopher, Jean-Paul Sartre remains an iconic figure. This book examines his philosophical ideas and methods. It is an introductory guide for the student who wishes to understand Sartre's philosophical argumentation. It reconstructs in plain language key instances of Sartre's philosophical reasoning at work and shows how certain questions arise for Sartre and what philosophical tools he uses to address those questions. Each chapter considers a range of issues in the Sartrean corpus including his conception of phenomenology, the question of self-identity, the Sartrean view of conscious beings, his understanding of the self, his theory of value, human action as both the originator and the outcome of social processes, dialectical reason, and his conception of artistic activity. Hatzimoysis uncovers the philosophical argumentation, identifies Sartre's most important philosophical ideas and addresses the arguments in which those ideas are employed. Readers are able to get a real understanding of Sartre's approach to the activity of philosophising and how his method favours certain types of philosophical analysis

Nausea by Jean-Paul Sartre is often interpreted as an ideal textbook summarising the main points of Sartre’s quite technical argumentation in his academic writings; it illustrates his theoretical views on the nature of time, while it presents a philosophical justification of art through the adventures of the novel’s hero, who is none other than the author in disguise. I show that, despite its popularity, this interpretation is incorrect. I provide an alternative reading of the novel that would identify its core themes, in a way that illuminates the reflective distance between the fictional agent and the philosophical narrator.

Talk of the unconscious in the philosophy of emotions concerns twothings. It can refer to an emotion whose existence is not in any way presentto consciousness. Or, it can refer to emotional phenomena whose meaning lies in the unconscious. My interest here is in the former issue of whether emotional states can exceed the reach of conscious awareness. I start with a presentation of psychoanalytic views that inform contemporary work toward a cognitivist analysis of emotion. The discussion of cognitivism leads to a consideration of work in experimental psychology that appears to establish the reality of emotional phenomena that transcend conscious awareness. However, I argue that a careful consideration of the relevant evidence falls short of supporting the claim that there are unconscious emotions

It seems hard to comprehend how, during mood experience, the ‘inner’ meets the ‘outer’. The objective of this paper is to show that a currently popular attempt at providing a neat solution to that problem fails. The attempt comes under the heading of representationalism, according to which the phenomenal aspects of mood are exhausted by its representational content. I examine three accounts of intentionality developed within the representationalist camp, and I show that they incur phenomenological and metaphysical costs.

This major volume of original essays maps the place of emotion in human nature, through a discussion of the relation between consciousness and body; by analysing the importance of emotion for human agency by pointing to the ways in which practical rationality may be enhanced, as well as hindered, by emotions; and by exploring questions of value in making sense of emotions at a political, ethical and personal level. Leading researchers in the field reflect on the nature of human feelings, how and why we understand what other people feel, and the way in which our values become involved in specific emotional phenomena, such as guilt, fear, shame, amusement, or love. This collection addresses important questions in the philosophy of mind and comments on the implications of research in biology, cognitive psychology, psychoanalysis, and narrative theory for the philosophical understanding of emotions.

“Passive fear” denotes a certain type of response to a perceived threat; what is distinctive about the state of passive fear is that its behavioral outlook appears to qualify the emotional experience. I distinguish between two cases of passive fear: one is that of freezing in fear; the other is that of fear-involved tonic immobility. I reconstruct the explanatory strategy that is commonly employed in the field of emotion science, and argue that it leaves certain questions about the nature of passive fear unanswered. I subsequently propose an account of passive fear that builds upon a phenomenological theory of emotions, placing emphasis on the interpretation of current research into human tonic immobility

What it is about mood, as a specific type of affect, that makes it not easily amenable to standard models of rationality? It is commonly assumed that the cognitive rationality of an affective state is somehow depended upon how that state is related to what the state is about, its so called intentional object; but, given that moods do not seem to bear an intentional relation to an object, it is hard to see how they can be in the offing for rational assessment. In the first part of the paper I outline three ways of attributing intentionality to moods, raising for each one of them a series of problems, thus casting doubt on the viability of an intentionalist grounding for the rationality of moods. I then move to an examination of the view of moods as background feelings, which are intimately related to how we perceive the world; however, in my view, that approach fails to provide standards of assessment that would permit appraising the mood itself as rational or irrational. Finally, I look at an account of moods as mechanisms whose function is to monitor the balance between environmental demands and one’s physical or psychological resources. That is a promising way to proceed in our exploration of mood states; it faces though some formidable phenomenological challenges. All in all, defending the rationality of moods calls for a rethinking of the assumptions that are prevalent in the current literature over the representational dimension of affective states.

Phenomenology has done more than any other school of thought for bringing emotions to the forefront of philosophical inquiry. The main reason for the interest shown by phenomenologists in the nature of emotions is perhaps not easily discernible. It might be thought that phenomenologists focus on emotions because the felt the quality of most emotional states renders them a privileged object of inquiry into the phenomenal properties of human experience. That view, in its turn, might lead one to think that phenomenologists attend to emotional experience for its highly subjective character. On the contrary, it is the ability of emotions to engage with reality that makes them crucial for phenomenological analysis. Emotional experience is an opening to the salient features of a situation; undergoing an emotion is a way – and, for some phenomenologists, the principal way – in which the world manifests itself to us. The exact character of that manifestation will be the main topic of discussion in the present chapter. We look at the two major accounts of the way in which that manifestation is structured. The first account is due to Martin Heidegger, and the second is articulated in the writings of Jean-Paul Sartre.