• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Tomas Sodeika

Vilnius University
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    24
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  Recommended
    17
  •  News and Updates
    3

 More details
  • Vilnius University
    Institute of Philosophy
    Professor
Areas of Interest
Metaphilosophy
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Religion
19th Century Philosophy
20th Century Philosophy
17th/18th Century Philosophy
European Philosophy
2 more
  • My recommendations
    17
  • My publications recommended by others
  • Psychologism and Description in Husserl's Phenomenology
    Tomas Sodeika
    Analecta Husserliana 34 (n/a): 219. 1991.
  • The Ingarden-Husserl Controversy: The Methodological Status of Consciousness
    Tomas Sodeika
    Analecta Husserliana 27 (n/a): 209-221. 1989.
  • Philosophy of Czesław Miłosz: Language and/or Reality? (review)
    Tomas Sodeika
    Problemos 80 176-182. 2011.
  • Philosophy as rigorous science and/or as tragedy : Husserl and Shestov
    Tomas Sodeika and Lina Vidauskytė
    In Teresa Obolevitch & Paweł Rojek (eds.), Faith and reason in Russian thought, Copernicus Center Press. 2015.
  • On the Immanuel Kant‘s “Pragmatical” Anthropology
    Tomas Sodeika
    Problemos 70. 2006.
  • Modest Spell of Nihilism (review)
    Tomas Sodeika
    Problemos 73 204-209. 2008.
  • Postmetafizinės Ungrund principo prielaidos Schellingo laisvės filosofijoje
    Brigita Gelžinytė and Tomas Sodeika
    Problemos 88 44. 2015.
  • On the Evidence and Description in Husserl’s Phenomenology
    Tomas Sodeika
    Filosofija. Sociologija 35 (1). 2024.
    The aim of this article is to highlight the nature of the fundamental moments of phenomenological research, such as evidence and description, and the ambivalence of their relationship to each other. On the one hand, both evidence and description are related to Husserl’s attempt to ‘return to the things themselves’. Evidence is understood by the founder of phenomenology as a relation to an object in which the meaning of that object is given to us immediately in the object itself. Description, on …Read more
    The aim of this article is to highlight the nature of the fundamental moments of phenomenological research, such as evidence and description, and the ambivalence of their relationship to each other. On the one hand, both evidence and description are related to Husserl’s attempt to ‘return to the things themselves’. Evidence is understood by the founder of phenomenology as a relation to an object in which the meaning of that object is given to us immediately in the object itself. Description, on the other hand, avoids what is characteristic of any interpretation-oriented methodology: the ‘substitution’ of an explanatory reconstruction for the object under study. A certain discrepancy between phenomenological evidence and phenomenological description becomes apparent when we take into account the reception of the text in which the experience of the evidence is described. What is usually overlooked is that an experience whose content is the text being read is not an experience whose content is the phenomenon described in the text. This confusion leads to a turning away from ‘the things themselves’ and a restriction of phenomenology to the realm of texts. The way to avoid this deformation is through a phenomenological reduction, which must be carried out not only by the phenomenologist-researcher but also by the reader of the texts that provide a description of phenomenological experience.
  • Apie filosofinę praktiką
    Tomas Sodeika
    Logos: A Journal, of Religion, Philosophy Comparative Cultural Studies and Art 108. 2021.
  • Das Heilige im Zeitalter seiner technischen Reproduzierbarkeit
    Tomas Sodeika
    In Jörg Lauster, Peter Schüz, Roderich Barth & Christian Danz (eds.), Rudolf Otto: Theologie - Religionsphilosophie - Religionsgeschichte, De Gruyter. pp. 639-650. 2013.
  • Ericho Neumanno „Naujoji etika”, arba psichologinė prieiga prie pamatinio etinio šiuolaikybės iššūkio
    Tomas Sodeika
    Logos: A Journal, of Religion, Philosophy Comparative Cultural Studies and Art. forthcoming.
  • Žmogus jo techninio reprodukuojamumo epochoje: ar Dievas dar gali mus išgelbėti?
    Tomas Sodeika
    Logos: A Journal, of Religion, Philosophy Comparative Cultural Studies and Art 109. 2021.
  • Sens, tekst a dialog
    Tomas Sodeika
    Colloquia Communia 80 (1-2): 71-79. 2006.
  • Apie tai, kaip Nietzsche‘i nepasisekė
    Tomas Sodeika
    Logos: A Journal, of Religion, Philosophy Comparative Cultural Studies and Art 110. 2022.
  • Fizyka i metafizyka rzeczywistości społecznej
    Tomas Sodeika
    Przeglad Filozoficzny - Nowa Seria 16 (4): 73-86. 1995.
  • Filosofija anapus pasakojimo teksto / Philosophy Beyond the Narrative Text
    Tomas Sodeika
    Žmogus ir Žodis 6 32-44. 2004.
  • Martin Heidegger’s Phenomenology of Boredom and Zen Practice
    Tomas Sodeika
    Dialogue and Universalism 30 (3): 205-224. 2020.
    In this article, Martin Heidegger’s phenomenology of boredom is compared with some aspects of Zen practice. Heidegger is primarily interested in boredom as a “fundamental mood,” which takes us beyond the opposition of the subject and object. Thus, boredom reveals the existence more initially than those forms of cognition that are the basis of classical philosophy and special sciences. As an essential feature of the experience of boredom, Heidegger singles out that being in this state we feel tha…Read more
    In this article, Martin Heidegger’s phenomenology of boredom is compared with some aspects of Zen practice. Heidegger is primarily interested in boredom as a “fundamental mood,” which takes us beyond the opposition of the subject and object. Thus, boredom reveals the existence more initially than those forms of cognition that are the basis of classical philosophy and special sciences. As an essential feature of the experience of boredom, Heidegger singles out that being in this state we feel that our attention is held by something in which we find nothing but emptiness. In the article, this emptiness is compared with the Buddhist concept of shunyata, and various forms of experiencing boredom are paralleled with the different types of concentration achieved in Zen practice. Besides, the question is discussed how the Buddhist perception of emptiness corresponds to Heidegger’s “openness.”
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback