My Contention with Husserl

Over the past couple of nights I have read through Moustakas’s (1994) chapter on transcendental phenomenology.  Clearly, Moustakas regards Husserl very highly, and I am now wondering if there is any way of escaping Husserl in Moustakas.  Personally, Husserl makes great sense to me aside from the concept of epoche or “the elimination of suppositions and the raising of knowledge above every possible doubt” (Moustakas, p. 26).  This epoche is otherwise known as bracketing (Madison, 2005).

According to Madison (2005), Heidegger disagreed with Husserl.  That is, while Husserl encouraged bracketing, Heidegger thought it was impossible or that “there is never a “pure” interpretation,” and I agree with this.  Actually, I think the concept of bracketing might undermine the legitimacy of phenomenology in the first place.  Phenomenology is concerned with the study of the subjective.  Consciousness builds schema upon schema or noetic factors and noemic meanings on top of each other.  There is no wiping subjectivity from the mind.

Yet, considering my issues with Husserl I am now unsure about my next course of action.  What would Heidegger do?  Would he just follow the methods outlined in Moustakas (1994) less any bracketing?  Recently, I was encouraged to obtain a copy of Van Manen’s phenomenology book, and I am hoping it will help.

Tonight I also looked over some material on visual ethnography (Pink, 2013).  While I cannot say I have visual ethnography “on the brain” or that I would make it central to my own work, I do not really see anything wrong with it.  Sure, there will be accusations of subjectivity, but I don’t think there is any method that can eliminate subjectivity.  Methods and interpretations are all constructs of the human mind, and they“help to produce the reality that they understand” (Law, 2004, p.5).     

Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Madison, S. D. (2005). Critical ethnography: Method, ethics, and performance. Thousand        Oaks, Sage.

Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.