Beyond the Phenomenology of the Inconspicuous

How does spirit appear? In fact, it does not appear, and for this reason, we could refer to it, following Heidegger, as “inconspicuous” (unscheinbar). The Heideggerian path investigates this inconspicuous starting from the Husserlian method, and yet, this is not the only Phenomenology of the “Inconspicuous” Spirit: Hegel had already thematized it in 1807. It is thus possible to identify at least two Phenomenologies of the “Inconspicuous” spirit. These two phenomenologies, however, do not simply put forth distinct phenomenological methods, nor do they merely propose differing modes of spirit’s manifestation. In each of these phenomenologies, rather, what we call “spirit” manifests different traits: in one instance, it appears as absolute knowing, and, in the other, it manifests “from itself” as “phenomenon”. Yet how, exactly, does spirit manifest “starting from itself as phenomenon”? Certainly not in the mode of entities, but rather in the modality that historical phenomenology, which also includes Edmund Husserl’s work, has grasped. A question remains, however: is the inconspicuous coextensive with “spirit”? Certainly, spirit is inconspicuous, but it is not only spirit that is such. A certain phenomenological practice understood this well, a practice that several French authors have pushed. Jean-Luc Marion, Michel Henry, and Jean-Louis Chrétien have all contributed, in a certain way, to the phenomenology of the inconspicuous. However, do these authors carry out a phenomenology of inconspicuous spirit? Perhaps what French phenomenology gives us today, after an itinerary that has discovered several senses of the inconspicuous, is precisely the return to spirit that is missing in, and was missed by, this tradition.

THE WORLD HAS BECOME LESS. IN MEMORY OF ANDREI KARAVASHKIN

The paper is devoted to the memory of Andrei Vital’evich Karavashkin (1964–2021) the philologist and historian, professor of the Russian State University for the Humanities. His scientific activities are considered. Its main results are noted: participation in the development of the methodology of historical phenomenology, that includes innovative ideas of “premiseless hermeneutics”, the concept of “royal sacrifice” and its role in the formation of the ideology of power in medieval Russia. Karavashkin made a great contribution to the study of the history and culture of Moscow Russia, the narrative of Ivan Peresvetov, Ivan the Terrible, Andrei Kurbsky. In the book “The Literary Custom of Old Rus” he proposed an original concept for the development of Old Russian literature. The importance of A.V. Karavashkin’s research in the humanities, synthesizing the historical and philological fields of knowledge is highly assessed.

Media Rituals and Memory: Exploring the Historical Phenomenology of American Local Television

For more than two decades during the mid-20th century, local entertainment television shaped daily experience across the United States. Although often viewed as trivial by historians, these extinct television genres offer valuable insights into the relationship among media technology, historical consciousness, and cultural memory. Emergent theories of historical phenomenology help facilitate and expand such insights. The phenomenological perspective, which focuses on the sensory experience of media technology in historical settings, illustrates how audience memories inform the historical significance of this programming. The present study utilizes insights from ethnographic data and historical recordings to fortify its findings.

Power from indirect pain: a historical phenomenology of medical pain management

The article aims at reconstructing how pain is used in contemporary societies in the process of engraving power. Firstly, a social phenomenological analysis of pain is conducted: Husserl’s and Merleau-Ponty’s ideas are used for clarifying the experience of pain itself; Elaine Scarry’s analyses are overviewed in order to reconstruct how pain contributes to the establishing of power. Secondly, this complex approach is applied in early modern context: the parallel processes of the decline of a transcendental and the emergence of a medical interpretation of pain is introduced, along with the marginalization of violence. Thirdly, the era characterized by the triumph of medical pain management is analysed: it is argued that the constitutive role of pain in establishing power does not cease to exist with the emergence of technologies of discursive governance (Foucault); it is an open question, what sort of power is engraved through pain understood in strictly medical frames.

Introduction

This chapter is an overview of the book’s argument, of the cathedral precinct spaces, their uses, and their users, and outlines the critical framework of the book. It provides an overview of the cathedral and precinct, attending to architectural details, and the various buildings and spaces in the church and precinct, including the interior of the church and the surrounding churchyard. The physical transformations of several sites is highlighted and the material state is discussed. The chapter considers the religious, commercial, civic, and social activities of Paul’s, and provides an overview of some of the everyday users of the space, emphasizing that the precinct operated as a neighbourhood and fostered community. The cultural geography methodology of the book is reviewed, and its approach aligned with historical phenomenology and the notion of spatial dynamism. The importance of both imaginative and literary texts to the overall understanding of St Paul’s is explored.

Afterword

Early modern scholarship’s turn to the body in the 1990s was driven by powerful dissatisfaction with the universal models of autonomous selfhood and trans-historical emotion inherited from traditional intellectual history. Newer cultural histories of the body produced a foundational recognition of the early modern body’s porous openness and of an ecological self in continual interaction with its environment. In rich archival detail, the chapters in this volume refine the embodied self’s complex placement in its inspirited cosmos from the animated ground up. Together, they demonstrate that the geography of embodiment is fundamental to any properly constituted historical phenomenology because the early moderns believed that their passions were reflected everywhere—in meteorology, sleep, landscapes, sheepfolds, and foreign lands.

DISKRIMINASI PEREMPUAN BERCADAR DALAM PERSPEKTIF HEGEMONI

This study aims to determine, describe, and explain people's perspectives on veiled women. The existence of community construction that veiled women are labeled as radicals, seen from the many historical phenomena about terrorism always related to women who use the veil. This study aims to look at discrimination against veiled women with a review of historical phenomenology in the study of hegemony. Through this research it can be seen that veiled women are labeled as radicals and terrorists. The understanding of hegemony emphasizes that hegemony will take place if the way of life, way of thinking and views of the people below and governing are influenced by the elite and the mass media. There should be no discrimination against women of any age, religion, ethnicity and status. All must be treated equally, fairly, and do not distinguish between culture, ethnicity, religion and social status. Discrimination in the use of veils in Indonesia which led to a ban on the use of veils on campus which later arose a criticism of the veil ban through the perspective of hegemony theory

ON THE ROLE OF “HISTORICAL PHENOMENOLOGY” IN THE RUSSIAN HISTORIOGRAPHY OF THE LATE 20TH — EARLY 21ST CENTURY

This article follows the discussion that developed in the Russian historiography around the postulates formulated by the founders of “historical phenomenology”. The author attempts to identify the most controversial topics of discussion and to form an idea of its role in the development of theoretical and methodological principles of the Russian medieval studies in the early 21st century. The study of the problem has required using historical-genetic and historical-comparative research methods. This article shows an extremely polarized attitude of the Russian researchers to the theoretical and methodological postulates of the “historical phenomenology”. The Russian historians have already addressed this problem, but their writings made no attempt to generalize the criticism or sum up the discussion. The new works, similarly to the previous ones, are written in the genre of criticism of the research program by A. L. Yurganov and A. V. Karavashkin and only multiply works of this nature. The author believes that the time has come to define the results of the controversy, to highlight the key ideas criticized by researchers, and thus, to determine the most controversial topics of the theoretical and methodological legacy of the Russian medieval studies in the early 21st century. Based on the intensity of critical comments, this paper identifies three of the most controversial positions of “historical phenomenology”. Special attention is paid to the problem of “explaining” and “understanding” the research methods, the idea of the “supra-historical” unity and the principle of “non-referentiality” in research analysis. This paper concludes that during the discussion, the Russian researchers clarified their views on the essence of a number of terms and concepts. The polemics initiated by A. L. Yurganov and A. V. Karavashkin allowed drawing clearer lines of demarcation both in the theory and practice of humanities research.