Interpretări ale fenomenologiei lui Ed. Husserl în viziunile lui P.P. Negulescu şi L. Blaga.
Interpretations of Ed. Husserl’s Phenomenology in P. P. Negulescu and L. Blaga’s Perspectives.

Summary/Abstract: The fundamental ideas of Ed. Husserl’s phenomenology benefited from various receptions in the Romanian philosophical culture. In our opinion, amongst these, two are remarkable and may be considered as frames or representative guides for complementary theoretical and methodological options. They are, on one hand, the perspective of Petre P. Negulescu on Husserl’s phenomenology, which he frames in the evolutive, even contradictory line of the neo-Kantian current. Thus, Husserl’s phenomenology (named by both Negulescu and Blaga as „phenomenologism”) appeared with the intention of attenuating the radical consequences of the logic apriorism formulated by H. Cohen. Since Cohen had formulated the conception of the pure original and collective thinking creating the world – thinking belonging to the entire human kind –, but lacking the experience attribute (in the usual meaning of this term), Husserl felt stimulated to search for a way out of this issue by admitting a logical intra-mental experience, which gives birth to a sort of empiricist a priorism or an a prioristic empiricism. On the other hand, L. Blaga makes reference to Husserl’s phenomenology not from a historical and philosophical perspective, but mostly from a metaphysical and systematical one. Thus, assuming the descriptive attribute (e.g. the description of the pure conscience phenomena in their very essence), this thinking current is located at the antipode of what Blaga considers to be the mission of metaphysics (e.g. to reveal mysteries), meaning in opposition to the problematic of the constructive (the lucipherian). Phenomenology increases conscience lucidity, with the price of drastically reducing the philosophical problematic. From the perspective of „mysteries metaphysics” – essentially engaged in a supreme constructive effort –, Blaga denounces the inconsistency of the phenomenology that, despite the radical reduction method, still keeps a latent „constructive” idea, represented by the very idea of essence. The two Romanian interpreters finally meet at the crossroads of the historic and systematic plans: whilst Negulescu sees the eidetic intuition as another possible method of conceptual knowledge, Blaga inscribes the phenomenology in a larger historical chapter of the philosophical problems „deflation”.

• Details
• Contents