Tag: Matrix

Acts of Perception and Their Objects

Pure acts are acts of the subject targeting objects of the real world. These acts are, precisely, the mediation between the subject and the object world.

After a few days of reading On the Problem of Empathy, I finally came up with a matrix showing the targets of some pure acts, categorizing them into two (2): the “I” and the other.

What is shown below is that the acts (the ones in the rows) can or cannot access certain parts of the individual (the ones in the columns).

The Matrix

Outer perception can access the physical body of the self, and also the physical and living body of the other. Bodily perception can access both physical and living body of the self. Inner perception can only access one’s own psyche. Empathy, which is a sui generis form of perception, can access the psyche of the other.

An insight that I get from this is that the subject, which is a psycho-physical individual, has itself acts which may be of help in getting a clearer picture of itself and of the other individual.

Clarification of Terms

  • The “I” is, of course, the self.
  • The other is another self, another “I.”
  • The psychic refers to the mind, the spirit, or the soul.
  • The physical body refers to the human body, but treated as a thing comparable to a pen or a chair.
  • The living body refers to the human body that has sensations.

“Have a Matrix of Categories”

Image by Free-Photos from Pixabay

“You must have a matrix of categories.” This is what my mentor told me when we met last Saturday.

Despite that we met an hour later than agreed because of miscommunication, at least I gained some insights from my mentor’s guidance. He asked for my progress, so I let him see the mind map I created, the “bits and pieces” of meanings of Edith Stein’s empathy, and the articles I already read and will have to read. I also told him that I was focused on re-reading Edith Stein’s On the Problem of Empathy.

He asked for clarification of terms. I satisfactorily answered some, but he rebuked me for my understanding of the other terms. He said that there are a lot of nuances carried by those terms. So, he strictly advised me to be exact in my understanding of those terms because Edith Stein used or understood those terms in a specific sense. For example, Edith Stein uses the word “perception,” but there is not one specific meaning for this term, for philosophers use this term in different senses. So, I must be exact by what Edith Stein means by perception when referring to empathy. Overall, then, I gained excellent guidance from my mentor.

For our next meeting, which is probably this Saturday, he said that I should present to him a matrix of categories. This is so that I will know exactly how empathy is to be understood in Steinian sense. For instance, because empathy is understood as a “cognition,” I must understand what exactly is cognition in Steinian sense, and what are its types. After knowing the meaning of cognition, I must know the similarities and dissimilarities of its types. Then, I must see where Edith Stein would put empathy on the categories (e.g., that empathy is a “sui generis” perception). My mentor told me to go on with this matrix, until I get a broad picture of what Edith Stein exactly means by empathy.

Time to read now!

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started