What does Husserl’s method of phenomenology illuminate concerning the nature of the human situation?

Instructions The third paper must concern the topic, ‘What does Husserl’s method of phenomenology illuminate concerning the nature of the human situation?’ [Thus, ‘phenomenology’ is here defined in the sense given by Husserl!] The papers need to be at least 2,300 words each. Quotations do not count toward the minimum word-count. There are essentially no ‘maximum’ limits for word-count. The final essay ought not substantially repeat material from earlier papers. Special tips for the final paper: Late work is in general not permitted. Work submitted after the Tuesday of finals week may not be graded. Course grades are due soon after finals week so it is important that students get all work in on-time. The instructor reserves the right to ignore all work submitted late. The third paper first needs to explain Husserl’s method before going into its value. I would advise you focus on those themes of space and time which animate our discussion. Also, though, if possible, I would like you to think about the meaning and implication of new ideas regarding space and Physics. If you do write on the social sciences, then in general I would not like to see a narrow focus on implications for Psychology or the social sciences, but rather wider considerations, e.g. aesthetics or political philosophy might be topics. There is unfortunately just such a lot of awful literature on Husserl from those in Psychology and related fields, e.g. Medicine, that is often wildly inaccurate: and I have seen students time and again get stuck in the morass of those distracting writings. Anything you can say about Physics and its wider meanings for our life is likely to be much more interesting than musing on better ‘research’ in Psychology or nursing, etc.: though of course there remains this wonderful topic of the ultimate unity of Physics and Psychology which provides a kind of exception to my caveats…. Avoid discussion of work outside of Philosophy (Psychology, psychiatry, Medicine, etc.) claiming knowledge of ‘phenomenology’ without first verifying that a correct understanding of Husserl is present. In general, I would recommend avoiding discussing material from ‘social scientists’ who are not philosophers. This is a Philosophy course. (There is much interesting work in Psychiatry which ‘takes inspiration’ from Husserl, but this work is really just in Psychiatry and deals with the nitty-gritty of healing minds. It is not directly relevant for Philosophy, but more to the point, it seems drowned-out by social science research which gets Husserl wrong.) –The paper main-topic asks you to discuss the value of insights developing from Husserl. I would try to focus on, what you personally find valuable. Of course, what you find valuable, can be prompted by what you read elsewhere as discussing implications of Husserl. So, all things being equal, you ought to pursue the ‘implications’ of Husserl discussed in the assigned reading, as tied to what Husserl illustrates for us. However, you may have some more definite idea, even something quite different than what is discussed as the implications of Husserl. –Nonetheless, I would advise staying away from anything to do with Husserl and ‘the body,’ as although many academics are excited about this topic, I have seen no evidence students at this level can hack that. Likewise, to try to base your account of the philosopher, Edmund Husserl, primarily on writings from outside Philosophy, does not make sense, particularly if a truly philosophic approach is not taken an instead the focus is with something practical, like Medicine. It can be good to use secondary sources to get ideas about what is valuable with Husserl, but take care in selecting sources appropriate for the course. Discussion of the relation of Heidegger to Husserl is encouraged but not strictly required. Remember that Heidegger seems to challenge Husserl’s phenomenology, the study of what appears, through a new science of ontology which looks also to the hidden, that which does not appear. Heidegger sees ontology and phenomenology as sharing a content, but looks to a new method with ontology which moves from the beginning point in description to a moment of explanation. In explanation, that which is not seen can explain what is seen. * 1. Make sure you have a strong thesis statement. Place your thesis statement in the first paragraph of your paper. Please make it the first sentence. Use ‘and,’ commands and semi-colons, etc., to fit all the thesis ideas into one, grammatical-sentence. 2. Make sure your paper is organised around the thesis-statement, working to support it. 3. Make the thesis specific, not ‘Socrates helps us with thinking,’ but instead ‘Socrates helps us with our thinking by offering his method of questioning to find contradictions, and to seek definitions; in particular, Socrates’ approach is beneficial in raising the idea, to know x, one must able to define x – this idea gives us a goal for our attempts at knowing.’ 4. Include numerous references, with page numbers. Try to use quotations. Try to reference your textbook. When your paper needs an in-text reference: give a quotation with a page-number. Then follow this up with a paraphrase of what you think the quotation means. Ideally, supply both the quotation and the paraphrase…. It is indeed very, very important to use primary sources, and to use secondary sources from outside our classroom only to clarify primary sources. (Obviously, then, there is more freedom when it comes to secondary sources, from within the classroom….) 5. You have to use MLA style. 6. Work on displaying your knowledge of Philosophy