7/28/2019 00240___257c73493c3eabc5686d62022bac0d1b

1/1

218 BIBLIOGRAPHY

centenary of the publication of the Investigations , and this anniversary was

celebrated with a number of collections examining the Investigations. In-cluded among them are the collections edited by Dan Zahavi and Frederik

Stjernfelt (One Hundred Years of Phenomenology, 2003), Denis Fisette

(Husserl 's Logical Investigations Reconsidered, 2003), D aniel Dahlstrom

(Husserls Logical Investigations, 2005), and K wok-ying Lau and John

Drummond (Husserls Logical Investigations in the N ew Century: Western

and Chinese Perspectives, 2007). Husserls other majo r logical workFor-

mal and Transcendental Log ic has been the subject of two extended com-

mentaries: Suzanne Bachelards (1957) La logique de Husserland Dieter

Lohmars (2000)Edmund Husserls Formale und transzendentale Logik.Husserls discussions of intentionality, meaning or sense, temporality,

and the self and ego are systematically intertwined, and treatments of any

one necessarily touch upon at least some o f the o thers. Important treat-

ments of Husserls theory of meaning can be found in Mohantys (1964)

Edmund Husserls Theory of Meaning, James Edies (1976) Speaking and

Meaning, Ernst Orths (1967) Bedeutung, Sinn, Gegenstand, Sokolowskis

Husserlian Meditations and Presence and Absence (1978), and Weltons

(1983) The Origins of Meaningand The Other Husserl.

There has been much controversy over the interpretation of Husserls

theory of intentionality and, in particular, the doctrine of the noema. Aron

Gurwitsch w as amo ng the first of Husserl's followers to focus attention

specifically upon the noema as a theme (see, for example, Husserls The-

ory o f Inten tionality in Historical Perspective, 1967). Gurwitschs v iew

was criticized by Hubert Dreyfus (The Perceptual Noema, 1972), but his

criticism simply assumed the interpretation of the noema forwarded by

Dagfinn Fllesdal (Husserls Notion of Noema, 1969) and developed (in

a slightly different direction) b y Ro nald McIntyre and David WoodruffSmith (Husserl and Intentionality , 1982). That interpretation, in turn, was

cri t ic izeda nd the Gurwitsch interpretation defended by Rich ard

Holmes (An Explication of Husserls Theo ry of the Noema, 1975),

Sokolowski (Intentional Analysis and the Noema, 1984), and Lenore

Langsdorf (T he No ema as Intentional Entity,1984). There have been

attempts to reconcile the varying interpretations; chief among the irenic

interpreters are Mohanty (Husserl and Fre ge), Welton (The Origins of

Meaning), and M ary Jeanne Larrabee (The N oema in Husserls Phenom-

enology, 1986). Drummond (Husserlian Intentionality and Non-Founda-tional Realism , 1990) has denied that the interpretations can be reconciled

and, although coming closer to the G urwitsch interpretation, he has criti-

cized both views.

Treatments of intentionality lead to discussions of the temporality of

consciousness and of inner time-consciousness. On these topics, pioneer-