Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification
Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Zahavi, Dan [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2016 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Topoi - Springer Netherlands, 1982, 38(2016), 1 vom: 25. Nov., Seite 251-260 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:38 ; year:2016 ; number:1 ; day:25 ; month:11 ; pages:251-260 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
OLC2054441775 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | OLC2054441775 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230504063748.0 | ||
| 007 | tu | ||
| 008 | 200819s2016 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)OLC2054441775 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-He213)s11245-016-9444-6-p | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 400 |a 100 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 7,11 |a 5,1 |a 24 |2 ssgn | ||
| 084 | |a PHILOS |q DE-12 |2 fid | ||
| 084 | |a LING |q DE-30 |2 fid | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Zahavi, Dan |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0002-2869-4951 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2016 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Band |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued that a focus on empathy is detrimental to a proper understanding of the we, and that the latter is more fundamental than any dyadic interaction, other phenomenologists, such as Stein, Walther and Husserl, insisted on the importance of empathy for proper we-experiences. In this paper, I will present some of the key moves in this debate and then discuss and assess Husserl’s specific proposal, according to which reciprocal empathy, second-person engagement and self-alienation are all important presuppositions for group-identification and we-identity. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Reciprocal empathy | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Phenomenology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a We-identity | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Collective intentionality | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Group-identification | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Second-person engagement | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Recognition | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Topoi |d Springer Netherlands, 1982 |g 38(2016), 1 vom: 25. Nov., Seite 251-260 |w (DE-627)129862851 |w (DE-600)283937-4 |w (DE-576)015175294 |x 0167-7411 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:38 |g year:2016 |g number:1 |g day:25 |g month:11 |g pages:251-260 |
| 856 | 4 | 1 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
| 912 | |a FID-PHILOS | ||
| 912 | |a FID-LING | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHI | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_72 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 38 |j 2016 |e 1 |b 25 |c 11 |h 251-260 | ||
| author_variant |
d z dz |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
article:01677411:2016----::eodesnnaeetefleainngo |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2016 |
| publishDate |
2016 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 doi (DE-627)OLC2054441775 (DE-He213)s11245-016-9444-6-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 100 VZ 7,11 5,1 24 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Zahavi, Dan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-2869-4951 aut Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued that a focus on empathy is detrimental to a proper understanding of the we, and that the latter is more fundamental than any dyadic interaction, other phenomenologists, such as Stein, Walther and Husserl, insisted on the importance of empathy for proper we-experiences. In this paper, I will present some of the key moves in this debate and then discuss and assess Husserl’s specific proposal, according to which reciprocal empathy, second-person engagement and self-alienation are all important presuppositions for group-identification and we-identity. Reciprocal empathy Phenomenology We-identity Collective intentionality Group-identification Second-person engagement Recognition Enthalten in Topoi Springer Netherlands, 1982 38(2016), 1 vom: 25. Nov., Seite 251-260 (DE-627)129862851 (DE-600)283937-4 (DE-576)015175294 0167-7411 nnns volume:38 year:2016 number:1 day:25 month:11 pages:251-260 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4305 AR 38 2016 1 25 11 251-260 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 doi (DE-627)OLC2054441775 (DE-He213)s11245-016-9444-6-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 100 VZ 7,11 5,1 24 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Zahavi, Dan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-2869-4951 aut Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued that a focus on empathy is detrimental to a proper understanding of the we, and that the latter is more fundamental than any dyadic interaction, other phenomenologists, such as Stein, Walther and Husserl, insisted on the importance of empathy for proper we-experiences. In this paper, I will present some of the key moves in this debate and then discuss and assess Husserl’s specific proposal, according to which reciprocal empathy, second-person engagement and self-alienation are all important presuppositions for group-identification and we-identity. Reciprocal empathy Phenomenology We-identity Collective intentionality Group-identification Second-person engagement Recognition Enthalten in Topoi Springer Netherlands, 1982 38(2016), 1 vom: 25. Nov., Seite 251-260 (DE-627)129862851 (DE-600)283937-4 (DE-576)015175294 0167-7411 nnns volume:38 year:2016 number:1 day:25 month:11 pages:251-260 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4305 AR 38 2016 1 25 11 251-260 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 doi (DE-627)OLC2054441775 (DE-He213)s11245-016-9444-6-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 100 VZ 7,11 5,1 24 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Zahavi, Dan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-2869-4951 aut Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued that a focus on empathy is detrimental to a proper understanding of the we, and that the latter is more fundamental than any dyadic interaction, other phenomenologists, such as Stein, Walther and Husserl, insisted on the importance of empathy for proper we-experiences. In this paper, I will present some of the key moves in this debate and then discuss and assess Husserl’s specific proposal, according to which reciprocal empathy, second-person engagement and self-alienation are all important presuppositions for group-identification and we-identity. Reciprocal empathy Phenomenology We-identity Collective intentionality Group-identification Second-person engagement Recognition Enthalten in Topoi Springer Netherlands, 1982 38(2016), 1 vom: 25. Nov., Seite 251-260 (DE-627)129862851 (DE-600)283937-4 (DE-576)015175294 0167-7411 nnns volume:38 year:2016 number:1 day:25 month:11 pages:251-260 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4305 AR 38 2016 1 25 11 251-260 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 doi (DE-627)OLC2054441775 (DE-He213)s11245-016-9444-6-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 100 VZ 7,11 5,1 24 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Zahavi, Dan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-2869-4951 aut Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued that a focus on empathy is detrimental to a proper understanding of the we, and that the latter is more fundamental than any dyadic interaction, other phenomenologists, such as Stein, Walther and Husserl, insisted on the importance of empathy for proper we-experiences. In this paper, I will present some of the key moves in this debate and then discuss and assess Husserl’s specific proposal, according to which reciprocal empathy, second-person engagement and self-alienation are all important presuppositions for group-identification and we-identity. Reciprocal empathy Phenomenology We-identity Collective intentionality Group-identification Second-person engagement Recognition Enthalten in Topoi Springer Netherlands, 1982 38(2016), 1 vom: 25. Nov., Seite 251-260 (DE-627)129862851 (DE-600)283937-4 (DE-576)015175294 0167-7411 nnns volume:38 year:2016 number:1 day:25 month:11 pages:251-260 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4305 AR 38 2016 1 25 11 251-260 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 doi (DE-627)OLC2054441775 (DE-He213)s11245-016-9444-6-p DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 400 100 VZ 7,11 5,1 24 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Zahavi, Dan verfasserin (orcid)0000-0002-2869-4951 aut Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification 2016 Text txt rdacontent ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen n rdamedia Band nc rdacarrier © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued that a focus on empathy is detrimental to a proper understanding of the we, and that the latter is more fundamental than any dyadic interaction, other phenomenologists, such as Stein, Walther and Husserl, insisted on the importance of empathy for proper we-experiences. In this paper, I will present some of the key moves in this debate and then discuss and assess Husserl’s specific proposal, according to which reciprocal empathy, second-person engagement and self-alienation are all important presuppositions for group-identification and we-identity. Reciprocal empathy Phenomenology We-identity Collective intentionality Group-identification Second-person engagement Recognition Enthalten in Topoi Springer Netherlands, 1982 38(2016), 1 vom: 25. Nov., Seite 251-260 (DE-627)129862851 (DE-600)283937-4 (DE-576)015175294 0167-7411 nnns volume:38 year:2016 number:1 day:25 month:11 pages:251-260 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4305 AR 38 2016 1 25 11 251-260 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Topoi 38(2016), 1 vom: 25. Nov., Seite 251-260 volume:38 year:2016 number:1 day:25 month:11 pages:251-260 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Topoi 38(2016), 1 vom: 25. Nov., Seite 251-260 volume:38 year:2016 number:1 day:25 month:11 pages:251-260 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Reciprocal empathy Phenomenology We-identity Collective intentionality Group-identification Second-person engagement Recognition |
| dewey-raw |
400 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Topoi |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Zahavi, Dan @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2016-11-25T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
129862851 |
| dewey-sort |
3400 |
| id |
OLC2054441775 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2054441775</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230504063748.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2016 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2054441775</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s11245-016-9444-6-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">400</subfield><subfield code="a">100</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,11</subfield><subfield code="a">5,1</subfield><subfield code="a">24</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PHILOS</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">LING</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-30</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zahavi, Dan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-2869-4951</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued that a focus on empathy is detrimental to a proper understanding of the we, and that the latter is more fundamental than any dyadic interaction, other phenomenologists, such as Stein, Walther and Husserl, insisted on the importance of empathy for proper we-experiences. In this paper, I will present some of the key moves in this debate and then discuss and assess Husserl’s specific proposal, according to which reciprocal empathy, second-person engagement and self-alienation are all important presuppositions for group-identification and we-identity.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Reciprocal empathy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Phenomenology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">We-identity</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Collective intentionality</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Group-identification</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Second-person engagement</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Recognition</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Topoi</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer Netherlands, 1982</subfield><subfield code="g">38(2016), 1 vom: 25. Nov., Seite 251-260</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129862851</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)283937-4</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)015175294</subfield><subfield code="x">0167-7411</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:38</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:25</subfield><subfield code="g">month:11</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:251-260</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-PHILOS</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-LING</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHI</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_72</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">38</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">25</subfield><subfield code="c">11</subfield><subfield code="h">251-260</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Zahavi, Dan |
| spellingShingle |
Zahavi, Dan ddc 400 ssgn 7,11 fid PHILOS fid LING misc Reciprocal empathy misc Phenomenology misc We-identity misc Collective intentionality misc Group-identification misc Second-person engagement misc Recognition Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification |
| authorStr |
Zahavi, Dan |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)129862851 |
| format |
Article |
| dewey-ones |
400 - Language 100 - Philosophy & psychology |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
OLC |
| remote_str |
false |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| issn |
0167-7411 |
| topic_title |
400 100 VZ 7,11 5,1 24 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification Reciprocal empathy Phenomenology We-identity Collective intentionality Group-identification Second-person engagement Recognition |
| topic |
ddc 400 ssgn 7,11 fid PHILOS fid LING misc Reciprocal empathy misc Phenomenology misc We-identity misc Collective intentionality misc Group-identification misc Second-person engagement misc Recognition |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 400 ssgn 7,11 fid PHILOS fid LING misc Reciprocal empathy misc Phenomenology misc We-identity misc Collective intentionality misc Group-identification misc Second-person engagement misc Recognition |
| topic_browse |
ddc 400 ssgn 7,11 fid PHILOS fid LING misc Reciprocal empathy misc Phenomenology misc We-identity misc Collective intentionality misc Group-identification misc Second-person engagement misc Recognition |
| format_facet |
Aufsätze Gedruckte Aufsätze |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
nc |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Topoi |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
129862851 |
| dewey-tens |
400 - Language 100 - Philosophy |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Topoi |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)129862851 (DE-600)283937-4 (DE-576)015175294 |
| title |
Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)OLC2054441775 (DE-He213)s11245-016-9444-6-p |
| title_full |
Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification |
| author_sort |
Zahavi, Dan |
| journal |
Topoi |
| journalStr |
Topoi |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
400 - Language 100 - Philosophy & psychology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2016 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
251 |
| author_browse |
Zahavi, Dan |
| container_volume |
38 |
| class |
400 100 VZ 7,11 5,1 24 ssgn PHILOS DE-12 fid LING DE-30 fid |
| format_se |
Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Zahavi, Dan |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 |
| normlink |
(ORCID)0000-0002-2869-4951 |
| normlink_prefix_str_mv |
(orcid)0000-0002-2869-4951 |
| dewey-full |
400 100 |
| title_sort |
second-person engagement, self-alienation, and group-identification |
| title_auth |
Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification |
| abstract |
Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued that a focus on empathy is detrimental to a proper understanding of the we, and that the latter is more fundamental than any dyadic interaction, other phenomenologists, such as Stein, Walther and Husserl, insisted on the importance of empathy for proper we-experiences. In this paper, I will present some of the key moves in this debate and then discuss and assess Husserl’s specific proposal, according to which reciprocal empathy, second-person engagement and self-alienation are all important presuppositions for group-identification and we-identity. © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 |
| abstractGer |
Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued that a focus on empathy is detrimental to a proper understanding of the we, and that the latter is more fundamental than any dyadic interaction, other phenomenologists, such as Stein, Walther and Husserl, insisted on the importance of empathy for proper we-experiences. In this paper, I will present some of the key moves in this debate and then discuss and assess Husserl’s specific proposal, according to which reciprocal empathy, second-person engagement and self-alienation are all important presuppositions for group-identification and we-identity. © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued that a focus on empathy is detrimental to a proper understanding of the we, and that the latter is more fundamental than any dyadic interaction, other phenomenologists, such as Stein, Walther and Husserl, insisted on the importance of empathy for proper we-experiences. In this paper, I will present some of the key moves in this debate and then discuss and assess Husserl’s specific proposal, according to which reciprocal empathy, second-person engagement and self-alienation are all important presuppositions for group-identification and we-identity. © Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_OLC FID-PHILOS FID-LING SSG-OLC-PHI GBV_ILN_72 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4305 |
| container_issue |
1 |
| title_short |
Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 |
| remote_bool |
false |
| ppnlink |
129862851 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
n |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T23:09:12.590Z |
| _version_ |
1803601211655454720 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">OLC2054441775</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230504063748.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">tu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">200819s2016 xx ||||| 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)OLC2054441775</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-He213)s11245-016-9444-6-p</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">400</subfield><subfield code="a">100</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">7,11</subfield><subfield code="a">5,1</subfield><subfield code="a">24</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">PHILOS</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">LING</subfield><subfield code="q">DE-30</subfield><subfield code="2">fid</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zahavi, Dan</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="0">(orcid)0000-0002-2869-4951</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Second-Person Engagement, Self-Alienation, and Group-Identification</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ohne Hilfsmittel zu benutzen</subfield><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Band</subfield><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract One of the central questions within contemporary debates about collective intentionality concerns the notion and status of the we. The question, however, is by no means new. At the beginning of the last century, it was already intensively discussed in phenomenology. Whereas Heidegger argued that a focus on empathy is detrimental to a proper understanding of the we, and that the latter is more fundamental than any dyadic interaction, other phenomenologists, such as Stein, Walther and Husserl, insisted on the importance of empathy for proper we-experiences. In this paper, I will present some of the key moves in this debate and then discuss and assess Husserl’s specific proposal, according to which reciprocal empathy, second-person engagement and self-alienation are all important presuppositions for group-identification and we-identity.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Reciprocal empathy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Phenomenology</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">We-identity</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Collective intentionality</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Group-identification</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Second-person engagement</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Recognition</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Topoi</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer Netherlands, 1982</subfield><subfield code="g">38(2016), 1 vom: 25. Nov., Seite 251-260</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)129862851</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)283937-4</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-576)015175294</subfield><subfield code="x">0167-7411</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:38</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:25</subfield><subfield code="g">month:11</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:251-260</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="1"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-016-9444-6</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_OLC</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-PHILOS</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">FID-LING</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHI</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_72</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">38</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">25</subfield><subfield code="c">11</subfield><subfield code="h">251-260</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.40211 |