Intentionality &
Narrativity in
Phenomenological
Research
Human Science and Phenomenology:
Reconsidering the Approach to
Experiences of Others
Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan
30 July 2016
Marc Applebaum PhD
Expanded presentation
This is an expanded version of the presentation I
gave at Meiji University in Tokyo on June 30,
2016, as part of a workshop kindly organized by
Drs. Shogo Tanaka and Kayoko Ueda. Dr. Ueda,
Dr. Masahiro Nochi, and Dr. Susi Ferrarello were
the other forum participants.
My full article, Intentionality and Narrativity in
Phenomenological Psychological Research,
relies primarily on Husserl’s Analyses
Concerning Passive and Active Synthesis, and
Ricoeur’s Time and Narrative.
Dynamism of
consciousness
For Husserl consciousness is characterized
by a constant ebb and flow of passive and
active intentionality
They are simultaneous layers of the locus of
consciousness that is the human being
The locus is multi-layered, and includes what
Husserl calls the personal ego, the
transcendental ego, and pre-egoic, primordial
strata
The personal layer is “in time,” the pre-
reflective layers are timeless
Phenomenological modes
Husserl’s static phenomenology
descriptively analyzes the contents of
active intentionality
His genetic phenomenology interpretively
explicates the contents of passive
intentionality
In Husserl’s work there is not a fixed
opposition between describing and
interpreting
Husserl’s methods
Static phenomenology: a descriptive
science that seeks to articulate the
intuitive grasping of objects in active
intentionality (reflective consciousness)
Husserl them began to explore the
passive genesis of meaning (pre-
reflective, pre-linguistic consciousness),
developing a genetic praxis that is
descriptive and hermeneutic
This was necessary because passive
intentionality cannot be accessed through
Genetic inquiry
Husserl spoke of investigating “on the basis of
concrete experience and description,” which
required
“Discovering the method of correlation-research,
the method for questioning back behind
intentional objectivity in a concretely disclosive
way. In a manner of speaking, genuine analysis
of consciousness is a hermeneutic of conscious
life, that latter taken as that which continuously
intends entities (identities) and constitutes them
within its own self in manifolds of consciousness
that pertain to those entities in essential ways.”
“Interpretation” for
PsychologyOne meaning of interpretation is a
position-taking with respect to the object
of consciousness, a perspective (Husserl,
Logical Investigations, Ideas I)
An alternate meaning of interpretation is a
self-consciously theorizing attitude, either
on the part of the researcher or the
research participant
I argue that in our interview data we
invariably encounter a variety of
intentional relations to the noematic object
“Perceptive interpretation”
Husserl names the actively intentional
determining of an object as something an
interpretive act, Auffassung, which can be
understood as a constituting interpretation,
or as Husserl puts it in Logical Investigations,
a “perceptive interpretation.” (1984, p. 762)
Descriptive research
practice
“Have you had an experience of X?”
For example: “Have you had an
experience of feeling deeply cared for by
another person? If so, can you describe in
detail what that experience was like?”
Amedeo Giorgi (2009) The Descriptive
Phenomenological Method in Psychology
Descriptive research
attitude
Aims to elucidate the psychological
structure of the phenomenon by gathering
descriptions in the natural attitude of
everyday life
We do not prompt participants to self-
consciously interpret or explain
However, rich description is required for
the data to be psychologically revelatory
What is “rich data”?
I propose that rich data stays close to the
lived interconnectedness, for the
participant, of passive and active
intentionality
We do not aim to encourage reflective
self-interpretation on the part of the
participant
But can we say that the natural attitude is
free of self-interpretation?
Varied modes of
interpretationDetermination (Auffassung): the participant’s
narrative is a specific position-taking with
respect to the experience
Emplotment: the participant’s narrative
articulation of their experience is a mimetic,
linguistic expression, not equivalent to the
prelinguistic expression “itself”
The narrative is representative of the
speaker’s narrative identity as protagonist of
their story, which is given in dialogue with a
particular Other in a particular social context
Interviews as narrative
• Interview narratives are interpretive in that
they are the participant’s selective
articulation of what she lived, an
emplotment that is sense-bestowing
through the exclusion of some some
details and highlighting of others in line
with an emerging plot
• Such narratives are mimetic acts in
relation to passive lived-experiences
understood as a limit rather than as
something that can be seized absolutely
The interview is an
experience
We ought not to neglect that the interview
itself is a lived-experience
We know as researchers that we are part
of the research situation
Our data is relational data, unavoidably, it
is as story told to an Other and
unavoidably in a kind of interchange with
the Other
Varieties of intending and
speaking
Speaking from an experience to the
Other
Speaking about an experience to the
Other
Explaining an experience to the
Other
Speaking from
The participant brings forward a meaning
that is immanent for them
This means it is already present
passively; they are actively grasping it
Their attention is first and foremost on the
intuitive presence of the phenomenon for
them
Speaking about
The participant is reflectively aware that
he or she is striving to convey the sense
of their story to the interviewer
Still in contact with the experience as
intuitively present, however attention is
largely focused on the expressive goal
and achieving an adequate objectification
of the story for the Other
Contact with the passively sedimented
meaning of the narrative may even be
lost as the expressive goal takes center
stage
Explaining to the Other
The participant goes beyond trying to
convey the sense of her story and seeks
to provide an explanatory or causal
account of the experience to the Other
In a theorizing or quasi-theorizing way
Example: “My therapist and I eventually
understood that what this experience
meant was X,” or “When I read Jung, I
understood that I was experiencing the
Great Mother archetype…”
Conclusions
Data is inescapably relational and arises
in a kind of dialogue
This does not mean that we need to
prompt participants to actively theorize
about their experiences
The varieties and constant shifting of the
colors and modes of intentionality
requires great sensitivity and care
References
Giorgi, A. (2009). The descriptive phenomenological method in
psychology: A modified Husserlian approach. Pittsburgh: Duquesne
University Press
Husserl, E. (1982). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a
phenomenological philosophy: First book, General introduction to a
pure phenomenology. (F. Kersten, Trans.). Boston: Kluwer.
Husserl, E. (1997). Phenomenology and anthropology (T. Sheehan &
R. E., Trans.). In T. Sheehan & R. E. Palmer (Eds.), Edmund Husserl:
Collected works, vol. 6: Psychological and transcendental
phenomenology and the confrontation with Heidegger (1927-1931)
(pp. 485-500). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Husserl, E. (2001). Analyses concerning passive and active synthesis:
Lectures on transcendental logic. A. J. Steinbock (Trans.). Boston:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Husserl, E. (2001b) Logical Investigations Volumes 1-2. J. N. Findlay
(Trans.). New York: Routledge.
Ihde, D. (1971). Hermeneutic phenomenology: The philosophy of Paul
Ricoeur. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
Thank you for your
attention!
Contact: mapplebaum@saybrook.edu
Blog: www.phenomenologyblog.com

Intentionality and Narrativity in Phenomenological Research

  • 1.
    Intentionality & Narrativity in Phenomenological Research HumanScience and Phenomenology: Reconsidering the Approach to Experiences of Others Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan 30 July 2016 Marc Applebaum PhD
  • 2.
    Expanded presentation This isan expanded version of the presentation I gave at Meiji University in Tokyo on June 30, 2016, as part of a workshop kindly organized by Drs. Shogo Tanaka and Kayoko Ueda. Dr. Ueda, Dr. Masahiro Nochi, and Dr. Susi Ferrarello were the other forum participants. My full article, Intentionality and Narrativity in Phenomenological Psychological Research, relies primarily on Husserl’s Analyses Concerning Passive and Active Synthesis, and Ricoeur’s Time and Narrative.
  • 3.
    Dynamism of consciousness For Husserlconsciousness is characterized by a constant ebb and flow of passive and active intentionality They are simultaneous layers of the locus of consciousness that is the human being The locus is multi-layered, and includes what Husserl calls the personal ego, the transcendental ego, and pre-egoic, primordial strata The personal layer is “in time,” the pre- reflective layers are timeless
  • 4.
    Phenomenological modes Husserl’s staticphenomenology descriptively analyzes the contents of active intentionality His genetic phenomenology interpretively explicates the contents of passive intentionality In Husserl’s work there is not a fixed opposition between describing and interpreting
  • 5.
    Husserl’s methods Static phenomenology:a descriptive science that seeks to articulate the intuitive grasping of objects in active intentionality (reflective consciousness) Husserl them began to explore the passive genesis of meaning (pre- reflective, pre-linguistic consciousness), developing a genetic praxis that is descriptive and hermeneutic This was necessary because passive intentionality cannot be accessed through
  • 6.
    Genetic inquiry Husserl spokeof investigating “on the basis of concrete experience and description,” which required “Discovering the method of correlation-research, the method for questioning back behind intentional objectivity in a concretely disclosive way. In a manner of speaking, genuine analysis of consciousness is a hermeneutic of conscious life, that latter taken as that which continuously intends entities (identities) and constitutes them within its own self in manifolds of consciousness that pertain to those entities in essential ways.”
  • 7.
    “Interpretation” for PsychologyOne meaningof interpretation is a position-taking with respect to the object of consciousness, a perspective (Husserl, Logical Investigations, Ideas I) An alternate meaning of interpretation is a self-consciously theorizing attitude, either on the part of the researcher or the research participant I argue that in our interview data we invariably encounter a variety of intentional relations to the noematic object
  • 8.
    “Perceptive interpretation” Husserl namesthe actively intentional determining of an object as something an interpretive act, Auffassung, which can be understood as a constituting interpretation, or as Husserl puts it in Logical Investigations, a “perceptive interpretation.” (1984, p. 762)
  • 9.
    Descriptive research practice “Have youhad an experience of X?” For example: “Have you had an experience of feeling deeply cared for by another person? If so, can you describe in detail what that experience was like?” Amedeo Giorgi (2009) The Descriptive Phenomenological Method in Psychology
  • 10.
    Descriptive research attitude Aims toelucidate the psychological structure of the phenomenon by gathering descriptions in the natural attitude of everyday life We do not prompt participants to self- consciously interpret or explain However, rich description is required for the data to be psychologically revelatory
  • 11.
    What is “richdata”? I propose that rich data stays close to the lived interconnectedness, for the participant, of passive and active intentionality We do not aim to encourage reflective self-interpretation on the part of the participant But can we say that the natural attitude is free of self-interpretation?
  • 12.
    Varied modes of interpretationDetermination(Auffassung): the participant’s narrative is a specific position-taking with respect to the experience Emplotment: the participant’s narrative articulation of their experience is a mimetic, linguistic expression, not equivalent to the prelinguistic expression “itself” The narrative is representative of the speaker’s narrative identity as protagonist of their story, which is given in dialogue with a particular Other in a particular social context
  • 13.
    Interviews as narrative •Interview narratives are interpretive in that they are the participant’s selective articulation of what she lived, an emplotment that is sense-bestowing through the exclusion of some some details and highlighting of others in line with an emerging plot • Such narratives are mimetic acts in relation to passive lived-experiences understood as a limit rather than as something that can be seized absolutely
  • 14.
    The interview isan experience We ought not to neglect that the interview itself is a lived-experience We know as researchers that we are part of the research situation Our data is relational data, unavoidably, it is as story told to an Other and unavoidably in a kind of interchange with the Other
  • 15.
    Varieties of intendingand speaking Speaking from an experience to the Other Speaking about an experience to the Other Explaining an experience to the Other
  • 16.
    Speaking from The participantbrings forward a meaning that is immanent for them This means it is already present passively; they are actively grasping it Their attention is first and foremost on the intuitive presence of the phenomenon for them
  • 17.
    Speaking about The participantis reflectively aware that he or she is striving to convey the sense of their story to the interviewer Still in contact with the experience as intuitively present, however attention is largely focused on the expressive goal and achieving an adequate objectification of the story for the Other Contact with the passively sedimented meaning of the narrative may even be lost as the expressive goal takes center stage
  • 18.
    Explaining to theOther The participant goes beyond trying to convey the sense of her story and seeks to provide an explanatory or causal account of the experience to the Other In a theorizing or quasi-theorizing way Example: “My therapist and I eventually understood that what this experience meant was X,” or “When I read Jung, I understood that I was experiencing the Great Mother archetype…”
  • 19.
    Conclusions Data is inescapablyrelational and arises in a kind of dialogue This does not mean that we need to prompt participants to actively theorize about their experiences The varieties and constant shifting of the colors and modes of intentionality requires great sensitivity and care
  • 20.
    References Giorgi, A. (2009).The descriptive phenomenological method in psychology: A modified Husserlian approach. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press Husserl, E. (1982). Ideas pertaining to a pure phenomenology and to a phenomenological philosophy: First book, General introduction to a pure phenomenology. (F. Kersten, Trans.). Boston: Kluwer. Husserl, E. (1997). Phenomenology and anthropology (T. Sheehan & R. E., Trans.). In T. Sheehan & R. E. Palmer (Eds.), Edmund Husserl: Collected works, vol. 6: Psychological and transcendental phenomenology and the confrontation with Heidegger (1927-1931) (pp. 485-500). Dordrecht: Kluwer. Husserl, E. (2001). Analyses concerning passive and active synthesis: Lectures on transcendental logic. A. J. Steinbock (Trans.). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Husserl, E. (2001b) Logical Investigations Volumes 1-2. J. N. Findlay (Trans.). New York: Routledge. Ihde, D. (1971). Hermeneutic phenomenology: The philosophy of Paul Ricoeur. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
  • 21.
    Thank you foryour attention! Contact: mapplebaum@saybrook.edu Blog: www.phenomenologyblog.com