Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Contesting the Will: Phenomenological Reflections on Four Structural Moments in the Concept of Willing

  • Wageningen University & Research

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The starting point of this article is the undeniable experience of conscious willing despite its rejection by scientific research. The article starts a phenomenology of willing at the level of the (epi)phenomenon of willing itself, without assuming its embeddedness in a faculty of the soul, consciousness and so forth. After the introduction, a brief history of the philosophy of willing is provided, from which the paradoxical conclusion is drawn that, according to phenomenologists like Heidegger and his followers, the dominance of the will is the main characteristic of the current age, whereas scientists deny the existence of a conscious will at all. Then, four structural moments of the phenomenon of willing are explored in contrast to traditional characterizations in order to rehabilitate and appreciate the phenomenon of willing in contemporary philosophy: the interconnectedness of the one who wills and that which is willed, the transcendence and demand character of that which is willed, the self-involvement of the one who wills and the ampliative nature of the act of willing. To this end, not only sources from the phenomenological tradition but also the affordance theory of the ecological psychologist James Gibson are critically discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)18-35
Number of pages18
JournalJournal of the British Society for Phenomenology
Volume49
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Jan 2018
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 The British Society for Phenomenology.

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Contesting the Will: Phenomenological Reflections on Four Structural Moments in the Concept of Willing'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this