A Merleau-Pontyian critique of Husserl's and Searle's representationalist accounts of action

36Citations
Citations of this article
32Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Husserl and Searle agree that, for a bodily movement to be an action, it must be caused by a propositional representation. Husserl's representation is a mental state whose intentional content is what the agent is trying to do; Searle thinks of the representation as a logical structure expressing the action's conditions of satisfaction. Merleau-Ponty criticises both views by introducing a kind of activity he calls motor intentionality, in which the agent, rather than aiming at success, feels drawn to reduce a felt tension. I argue that Searle can account for Merleau-Ponty's kind of coping only by broadening his notion of propositional representation to include indexicals, but that, in so doing, he covers up the way representational intentionality depends upon motor intentionality.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Dreyfus, H. L. (2000). A Merleau-Pontyian critique of Husserl’s and Searle’s representationalist accounts of action. In Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society (Vol. 100, pp. 287–302). Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0066-7372.2003.00017.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free