Sabrina De Biasio

The article offers a phenomenological account of constructive memory by combining Bartlett’s theory of remembering with Schutz’s theory of relevance and Husserl’s thoughts on misremembering. It demonstrates that the phenomenological approach to the structure of consciousness significantly illuminates Bartlett’s theory. According to Bartlett, memories are constructed from schemas of past experiences, but his account remains somewhat unclear as to the role that interests and attitudes play in the process. Conversely, drawing on Husserl, Schutz provides detailed insight into how our motives and corresponding attitudes structure the establishment, organisation, and activation of schemas in perception. We argue that remembering and memory errors resulting from the constructive nature of memory are shaped by the thematic, interpretative, and motivational relevance of past experiences. More specifically: (1) memories are constructed by means of attentional shifts within their temporal and thematic horizons, and the fusion of different but related horizonal content; (2) this is an associative process governed by motivations and the social context at the time of recall. False memories are constructed from true memories, where the structure of this composition depends on the motivational context in which memories are generated.

In this paper, we draw on Alfred Schutz’s theoretical framework to better understand how oppression is enacted through discriminatory acts. By closely examining the role of typifications and relevances in our experience of others, and by supplementing this analysis with contemporary social scientific resources, we argue that a Schutzian perspective on oppression yields important phenomenological insights. We do this in three key steps. Firstly, we contextualise _Equality and the Meaning Structure of the Social World_ within Schutz’s broader body of work, elucidating his central conditions of discrimination. Secondly, we highlight the limitations of Schutz’s account, in how it fails to capture more peripheral, subtle, and implicit oppressive practices. Finally, we introduce two underexplored insights derived from Schutz’s framework: the role of relevances in understanding the motivational underpinnings of implicit biases, and the connection between self-typification and stereotype threat. With this multidimensional approach, we hope to enhance our understanding of oppression whilst bridging gaps in Schutz’s original conceptualization.