In The Primacy of Perception Merleau-Ponty (1964) remarked, “psychology and philosophy are nourished by the same phenomena; it is only that the problems become more formalized at the philosophical level” (p. 24). Phenomenological philosophy, as much as psychology, is concerned with the study of consciousness and the life of psyche. What is the relationship between the two, for phenomenologists? I explore the interrelationship of the two through the lens of Aristotle's reflection on sofia (wisdom) and phronesis (praxis-understanding).

1. Grasping the Psychical
Phenomenologically:
philosophy and
psychology
Marc Applebaum, PhD
Saybrook Graduate School

2. For phenomenology, what is the relationship
between philosophy and psychology, as
ways of inquiring into the psychical?
Point of departure

3. An indication from Merleau-
Ponty
“Psychology and philosophy are nourished
by the same phenomena; it is only that the
problems become more formalized at the
philosophical level.”
The Primacy of Perception, 1964, p. 24

4. Philosophia and Phronesis
I will reflect on the relationship between
phenomenological philosophy and
psychology through two terms from
Aristotle‟s Ethics--
Φιλοσοφία love of wisdom or
knowledge
Φρόνησις praxis-understanding
Proposition: the guiding aim of
phenomenological philosophers is
sophia, whereas for psychologists it is
phronesis

5. Theoria in Phenomenology
“What is interesting about phenomenology has
always been the attempt at a sophisticated
analysis of the embeddedness of theoria in the
lifeworld.”
Dodd, 2012, p. 435
This embeddedness has important implications
for both philosophy and psychological
phenomenologies…

6. Three claims
Philosophy pursues the sophia of psyche,
whereas psychology seeks a more
phronetic relationship to psychical life
Philosophical phenomenology prizes the
formal beauty of reasoned arguments;
phenomenological psychology prizes
fidelity to the messiness of lived-
subjectivity, with an aim to work with the
way that subjectivity can be lived
differently
Both are refreshed by repeatedly
returning “to the things themselves”

7. Phronesis in Aristotle
Does phronêsis rule all the other things in the soul,
as some think…? Surely it doesn‟t. For one cannot
think it to rule better things [than it], such as
sophia…presumably, though, it has control the way
a steward has in a household. For he is in control of
everything and manages everything. Still, it doesn‟t
yet follow that he rules everything; instead, he
provides leisure for his master, so that he,
unhindered by daily necessities, may not be
prevented from doing any noble actions that are
befitting. So likewise phronêsis is a sort of steward
of sophia, procuring leisure for it…
Aristotle, Ethics (Reeve, 2013, p. 25)

8. Philosophical versus phronetic
phenomenologizing
Φιλοσοφία
goal: universal
knowledge for its own
sake
Φρόνησις
goal: guiding practical
actions in the world
Rational analysis of the
structures of
consciousness as such;
yields insight
Knowledge of
subjectivity as para-
rational, para-logical*,
and lived; yields
intervention
*Giorgi (1993)

9. A continuum
Aim: knowledge for the
sake of insight
Content: formal, idealized
representations
Aim: provisional
understanding to inform
acting in the world
Content: messier, more
contextual representations
Sophia Phronesis

10. Two kinds of engagement
The pursuit of
knowledge
for its own sake, even
for the joy of knowing
Intervention based on
understanding, where
inter + venire = “coming
between” or
“interrupting”
Sophia Phronesis

11. Standards for
phenomenological praxis
The standard is
phronetic: can
understanding of lived-
experience, thus living
itself, be moved
forward?
The standard is
theoretic: is there
enough insight to move
knowledge forward?
PsychologyPhilosophy

12. “pathologies”
Embodied life is
subordinated to
idealizations about it;
purely general and formal
Reluctance to engage in
the messiness of lived-
Only practical questions
count—fundamental ones
are neglected; purely
individualistic
Reluctance to engage in
rigorous theoretical debate
PsychologyPhilosophy

13. Interplay of philosophy and
psychology
Phenomenological psychology relies upon
philosophy for its epistemology…so its
praxis is dependent upon philosophy
It‟s not clear why philosophy as an
academic discipline would need
psychology?
Therefore the reciprocal interrelationship
I‟m interested in is not necessarily required
by the natures of the inquires as academic
disciplines

14. Interplay relative to praxis
Can dialogue with
philosophy to clarify the
meanings of inchoate lived-
experiences as they emerge
into consciousness
Can dialogue with
psychology to clarify the
applications of its formal
insights in the lived-
world
PsychologyPhilosophy

15. The „primacy of perception‟
“…we mean that the experience of perception is our
presence at the moment when things, truths, values
are constituted for us; that perception is a nascent
logos; that it teaches us, outside all dogmatism, the
true conditions of objectivity itself…it is not a
question of reducing human knowledge to sensation,
but of assisting at the birth of this knowledge….”
Merleau-Ponty, 1964.The Primacy of
Perception, p. 25
Psychology focuses on facilitating at the birth of this
knowledge, close to the lived-experiences within which
it is imminent. Philosophy is focused on perfecting the
articulation of the truths and values embodied in this
logos.

16. References
Dodd, J. (2012). Political philosophy 429-438 The
Routledge companion to phenomenology (S. Luft and S.
Overgaard, Eds.). New York: Routledge.
Giorgi, A. (1993). Psychology as the science of the
paralogical. Journal of Phenomenological Psychology, 24
(1), 64-77.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1964). The Primacy of Perception.
Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Reeve, C. D. C. (2013). Aristotle on practical wisdom:
Nichomachean ethics VI (C. D. C. Reeve, Trans.).
Cambridge: Harvard University Press.