Phenomenology as Soteriology: Husserl and the call for “<i>Erneuerung</i>” in the 1920s
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Hegel claims famously in his Lectures on the Philosophy of Religion that “Philosophy is itself, worship; it is religion.” In this essay, it is argued that such a claim could also have been uttered by Husserl – with the much expanded sense that authentic philosophy is equivalent to phenomenology. It is especially present in what might be named Husserl’s “proto‐Crisis” texts of the early 1920s. In his call for “renewal” not only of philosophy and science, but culture in general, we see this entanglement of philosophy and religion. In the first part of the essay, it is shown that Husserl’s “critique” of religious tradition is parallel to his critique of the “garbs of ideas” that forms the incomplete “rationality” of the natural sciences. In the second part, attention is given to Husserl’s more positive description of the core rationality that can be found in the religious “lifeworld,” and how this allows him to see phenomenology itself as analogous to religious life. In the conclusion, some of the positive aspects, and also some of the dangers, of Husserl’s analogy between phenomenology and religion are addressed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.059 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".