Abstract
AbstractPhenomenology’s return to lived experience and “to the things themselves” is often contrasted with the synthesized perspective of science and its “view from nowhere.” The extensive use of neuropsychological case reports in Merleau-Ponty’s Phenomenology of Perception, however, suggests that the relationship between phenomenology and science is more complex than a sheer opposition, and a fruitful one for the praxis of medicine. Here, I propose a new reading of how Merleau-Ponty justifies his use of Adhémar Gelb and Kurt Goldstein’s reports on Johann Schneider for his phenomenology of embodied perception. I argue that for Merleau-Ponty these neuropsychological case reports represent a coherent deformation of the intercorporeally expressed existence of Schneider that through speech fall again onto the common ground of perception, thereby allowing Merleau-Ponty to understand, in the equivalent sense delivered by language, Schneider’s total being and fundamental illness. I then discuss what Merleau-Ponty’s method implies for a phenomenological praxis of medicine, and for the role of science in this praxis.
Funder
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Philosophy,Sociology and Political Science
Reference39 articles.
1. Beringer, K. (1926). Denkstörungen und Sprache bei Schizophrenen. Zeitschrift für die gesamte Neurologie und Psychiatrie, 103(1), 185–197.
2. Bullington, J. (2013). The Expression of the Psychosomatic Body From a Phenomenological Perspective. Dordrecht: Springer.
3. Carman, T. (2012). Foreword. In M. Merleau-Ponty, Phenomenology of Perception (D. A. Landes, Trans.). New York, NY: Routledge.
4. Dreyfus, H. L. (2007). Reply to Romdenh-Romluc. In T. Baldwin (Ed.), Reading Merleau-Ponty: On Phenomenology of Perception (pp. 59–69). New York, NY: Routledge.
5. Duden, B. (1993). Disembodying Women: Perspectives on Pregnancy and the Unborn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.