Phenomenology: The Study of
Consciousness
Art Warmoth
Psy 307
©9/1/06
Approaching an understanding of self-reflective human consciousness requires us to confront a fundamental paradox: On the one hand, consciousness lives in the eternal present. That is to say, human consciousness as such is uniquely personal. It is the most intimate ground and foundation of our personhood, of our life itself. On the other hand, human knowledge–that is to say, what human consciousness does–is essentially social or intersubjective.
Phenomenology can be most simply described as the disciplined (or systematic) study (description) of human consciousness (human experience). Since consciousness itself is the context of all explanations, it cannot strictly speaking be explained, only described and interpreted. Explanations in the strict sense are the province of objective natural science. The patterns described by phenomenology (and psychoanalysis) can lead to insights and to plausible predictions of future behavior. But these predictions only make sense on the basis of our capacity for empathy, for understanding the reasons some potential action makes sense.
There are two primary domains of phenomenological description. The first, which was pioneered by Edmund Husserl, focuses on the rich description of the eternal present (the here and now). Its method is based on “bracketing.” This method has been widely used by humanistic and transpersonal psychologists to better understand the experience of clients. The other approach is phenomenology as historical interpretation. This approach has been less clearly circumscribed as method, but it has been called “phenomemology” by philosophers including G. W. F. Hegel (1977) and Ernst Cassirer (1944). It also appears as the history of ideas, or of consciousness, and indeed it is a dimension of all historical study.
Bracketing (epoché)
Bracketing requires the suspension of preconceptions and concentration on the immediate contents of awareness. This approach has been widely used to study psychological states such as loneliness, depression, and joy. As outlined in Figure 1, we can define three basic domains of the phenomenological field:
1. The Subjective This is all of the perceptions and knowledge
that belongs to oneself alone.
These may be experiences that are so amorphous or chaotic that we cannot
find the words (or other symbolic forms) to communicate them. Or they may be insights that are so
personal that we choose not to communicate them.
2. The Intersubjective. This realm exists within the larger framework of lived life and it is the realm that is created by the human capacity for communication, primarily symbolic communication. It is the basis for the construction of all human knowledge and the creation of all human relationships and institutions. This fact is the foundation of social
philosophy or the history of consciousness. But it is remarkable that the importance of this domain has been so little noticed in theorizing about social phenomena.
3.
The Objective. This is a special realm within the intersubjective
realm that includes the natural sciences, and it is the realm that has been
honed to a fine art by the intellectual life of modern humans (mainly men,
actually, and including science, philosophy, and scholarship in general). Its salient feature is that the facts
on which it is based are observable by more than one observer, and all
adequately prepared observers report essentially the same observations.
From a psychological or sociological perspective, the intersubjective point of view is the most important. This is partly because it is the basis of all human cultural life (including objective scientific culture), partly because it is the most overlooked of the three domains, and partly because it is the most challenging domain in that it faces
psychology with the challenge of understanding the dynamics of effective communication.
The
key to understanding the significance of the intersubjective domain is what
José Ortega y Gasset (1957) calls “the compresence of the other.“ This concept can be explained quite
simply by considering what me mean by the “presence” of a physical
object–an apple, a chair, an automobile. When we observe any of these, there is a side that is
present, and a side that is compresent. That
is, a side (and an interior) that can become present if we move around the
object (or take it apart).
However, we are also unshakably convinced that there is an interiority
to other persons that we know is there, even if we can never observe it
directly. The organized system
characteristics or our selves and of others are the result of an evolutionary history
that was shaped by the survival value of effective symbolic communication.
Historical Interpretation
All
of our psychological functioning–perceiving, knowing, feeling,
willing–is immersed in a cultural system that is shaped by our
participation in a historical stream of shared consciousness that is by our
personal and collective evolutionary history. (Ortega y Gasset, 1961) That historical stream of shared
consciousness functions as a coherent, organized, constantly developing
symbolic system that is transpersonal (that is, social, including but not
limited to the spiritual) in character.
. According to Clifford Geertz (1973), the
culminating phase of human biological evolution was intimately intertwined with
the development of language and other basic forms of culture:
The
Pleistocene period, with its rapid and radical variations in climate, land
formations, and vegetation, has long been recognized to be a period in which
conditions were ideal for the speedy and efficient evolutionary development of
man; now it seems also to have been a period in which a cultural environment
increasingly supplemented the natural environment in the selection process so
as to further accelerate the rate of hominid evolution to an unprecedented
speed. The Ice Age appears not to have been merely a time of receding brow
ridges and shrinking jaws, but a time in which were forged early all those
characteristics of man's existence which are most graphically human: his
thoroughly encephelated nervous system, his incest-taboo-based social
structure, and his capacity to create and use symbols. The fact that these
distinctive features of humanity emerged together in complex interaction with
one another rather than serially as so long supposed is of exceptional
importance in the interpretation of human mentality, because it suggests that
man's nervous system does not merely enable him to acquire culture, it
positively demands that he do so if it is going to function at all. . . .A
cultureless human being would probably turn out to be not an intrinsically
talented though unfulfilled ape, but a wholly mindless and consequently
unworkable monstrosity. (pp. 67-68)
Figure 2 provides an overview of the
stages of the evolution of human consciousness, viewed in terms of the
evolution of evermore complex forms of communication technology. We are now in a new major stage of
human cultural evolution driven by electronic communication and information
processing technology. We still
are far from knowing what it all means.
The
cultural worldview of any particular society must be learned by its
members. In order to become a
functioning member of a particular society, a child must learn something about
all or most of the dimensions of its richness and complexity within a
remarkably short period of time.
The developmental challenge of the individual is to learn to participate
in and master a reasonable repertoire of these forms. A rough stage developmental model of how this works can be
correlated with Erik H. Erikson’s (1963) model of psychosocial stages, as
presented in Figure 3.
Even in a
relatively homogeneous culture, it is important to note the qualitative
(phenomenological) differences in the experience of participants at different
levels of psychosocial development.
Berger and Luckmann, in The Social Construction of Reality (1967), make a useful distinction between
primary and secondary
socialization. Primary socialization takes place in
the early stages of life and is mediated by the family. This is the pre-genital phase of development
that Freud and other psychoanalysts have explored extensively. Psychoanalysis has demonstrated
that the tacit frameworks of personal identity laid down in this developmental
process are largely unconscious, or at least nonverbal.
Secondary acculturation is the process of
initiation into adult identity and roles.
In traditional societies, it is accomplished through a variety of
initiation rituals, while in modern societies it is largely mediated by the
educational system, with considerable assistance from the media and peer
relationships. While childhood and
adult identity in traditional societies are continuous, the demands of adult
identity in the postmodern world lead to many discontinuities. Robert Jay Lifton (1993) has advocated
a “protean self” as the appropriate postmodern model, a theme
echoed by Kenneth Gergen (1991) and Walter Truett Anderson.
In the postmodern world, many value
frameworks that are taken for granted in traditional cultures become debatable:
family values, sexual mores, ideas of authority, rules of commerce, standards
of fairness and justice. Secondary
acculturation involves developing the knowledge and skills to be able to
participate effectively in these debates and their consequent choices. One of the metachoices facing citizens
of the postmodern world is whether those choices will be made by democratic or
authoritarian strategies of system self-organization. Democratic systems require active participation in that
process. Authoritarian systems
offer the option of choosing not to choose–choice is left to someone else
who is presumed to “know better.”
Humanistic and transpersonal psychology
have an important role to play in the development of a more democratic and
humane social order. The key to
this is to develop the skills which Carl Rogers called as “empathic
listening” and “unconditional positive regard.” In a political context, the
former translates into active listening in dialogue and debate; the latter
becomes acceptance and inclusiveness.

Figure 1. The Phenomenological Field
|
LIMITING DOMAIN (WORLDVIEW) |
COMMUNICATION“TECH” Neuro-Psychological
Tools Symbolic
Tools |
SOCIAL SYSTEMS
|
|
|
Reptilian Brain Mammalian
Brain |
|
|
Archetypal Mythology, Culture Religion |
Neo-Cortex Language
Art
Writing,
Mathematics Agriculture Theocracy Astronomy
Bureaucracy Taxation Army |
Tribal
Groups Civilization |
|
Conceptual Philosophy Renaissance,
Reformation Enlightenment Industrial Revolution |
Politics Print
Natural
Sciences
Academic Parliamentary
|
Classical
Civilization Modern
Civilization |
|
Conceptual/Integral Conscious
Evolution |
Electronic Info Processing& CommunicationMass Media (electronic) Ecological |
Postmodern
Globalizing |
Figure
2. THE EVOLUTION OF CONSCIOUSNESS
|
Erikson's Stages |
Cultural Development Stages |
|
1. Trust vs. Basic Mistrust |
Stage 1. (Preoedipal & Oedipal stages.) Learns language (discursive)
and basic repertoire of presentational (narrative & imaginal) symbolic
forms |
|
3. Initiative vs. Guilt |
Stage 2. Consolidation of symbolic skills & worldview |
|
5. Identity vs. Role Diffusion |
Stage 3. Initiation into adult roles & sexuality |
|
7. Generativity vs. Stagnation |
Stage 4. Consolidation, modification & transformation of
the cultural repertoire |
Figure
3. Erikson's Stages & the Development of Cultural Identity
Anderson, Walter
Truett. (1997). The Future of the Self. New
York: Jeremy P. Tarcher/Putnam
Berger, Peter
L. & Luckmann, Thomas. (1967).
The Social Construction of Reality. Garden
City, NY: Doubleday/anchor
Cassirer, Ernst.
(1944). An Essay on Man. New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press
Erikson, Erik H.
(1963). Childhood and Society. New York:
W. W. Norton
Geertz, Clifford
(1973). The Interpretation of Cultures.
New York: Basic Books
Gergen, Kenneth.
(1991) The Saturated Self. New York:
Basic Books.
Hegel, G. W. F.
(1977). Phenomenology of Spirit (tr. A.
V. Miller). Oxford: Clarendon.
Lifton, Robert
Jay. (1993). The Protean Self. New York:
Basic Books
Ortega y Gasset,
José. (1957). Man and People (tr.
Willard R. Trask). New York: W. W. Norton.
Ortega y Gasset, José. (1961). History as a System and other Essays
Toward a Philosophy of History (tr. Helene
Weyl, William C. Atkinson, Eleanor Clark). New York: W. W. Norton.