Skip to main content
Log in

Mapping the Imagination: Distinct Acts, Objects, and Modalities

  • Published:
Husserl Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article begins by presenting the two most important transformations that establish a genuine Husserlian approach to the imagination: the first lies in the grasping of imagination, despite its essential differences with perception and hallucination, as an intuitive, or sensuous consciousness (thereby contrasting it with signification); the second lies in the insight that imagination, or better – phantasy –, requires no images, mental or otherwise (thereby contrasting it with image consciousness). Further, the distinction between pure and perceptual phantasies and their respective fictional objects is drawn out. A comparison between pure phantasy and memory, then leads to a closer look at the role of inner consciousness in pure phantasy and to a clarification of the ‘splitting of the subject’. The exploration of this split allows us to trace the role of the real-ego and the phantasy-ego in pure phantasy, which opens the exploration of phantasy as a consciousness of possibilities. This helps us gain clarity about the nature of both real and ideal possibilities and the respective modes of phantasy. Objects of phantasy also most easily lend themselves to an eidetic variation and to an insight into essences. Phenomenological essences concern the ideal possibility of real and ideal objects and of their experience. It is through their contribution to insight into the real and ideal conditions of possibility of different forms of intentional acts that acts of phantasy best show their potential for Husserl’s project of philosophy as a rigorous science. Imagination or fiction becomes, in his own words, the ‘vital element of phenomenology.’

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This is not to say, of course, that the neutralization of the belief in the existence of the real world, which is at stake in the case of the epoché, involves an explicit act of imagination and its specific kind of neutrality towards the real existence of its (fictive) objects. Equally, despite the fact that imagination naturally draws our attention to the intentional correlation between act and object, it does not automatically lead to a transcendental understanding of this correlation and its ‘constitutive’ performance.

  2. For full references to the Husserliana volumes (Hua hereafter), see the shared bibliography, at the end of the guest editors’ introduction, for the special issue this paper is part of.

  3. This is why Husserl, in the 1920s, will cease using the term “neutralization” to characterize the absence of a doxical positing concerning the object of a pure phantasy. Given the lack of an original positing of the object, its givenness in the mode of the ‘as if’ cannot be understood as the result of a neutralized positing (cf., Nr. 20).

  4. Cf. Bernet (2005).

  5. In Part I of Hua XLII Husserl also considers the case of interruptions or ‘passages,’ such as sleep, in the continuous real life of one and the same real-ego. It seems fair to say that falling asleep, as the ‘phenomenon of a passage’ (Übergangsphänomen), concerns the real-ego and how she absents herself from her wakeful life in the real world. As a passive activity of the real-ego, falling asleep (or awakening) must furthermore involve an inner consciousness of a radical change in her life. In addition, a sleeper can also become aware of her sleeping when she has an (unpleasant) dream that, however, doesn’t awake her. In this case, the unconscious inner awareness the sleeper has of her sleeping, is, as it were, awakened by the contrast between her real-ego that sleeps and her dream-ego(s). She could then say to herself: ‘the event is not real, it is only a dream I have, and I am still sleeping’. Despite the similarities between sleep-dreaming and acts of imagination, one should not forget that the sleeping real-ego – unlike the awake real-ego that entrains phantasies – does no longer explicitly participate in a real life in the real world. Also, dreams being made of false perceptions (or hallucinations) and not of imagined quasi-perceptions, the dream-ego, unlike the phantasy-ego, is not a quasi-ego but a pretended ego. Finally, and most importantly, the manner in which inner consciousness attends to the contrast or scission between two simultaneous modes of life of a same subject, is different in wakeful imagination and in dreaming sleep. In summary: unlike the events of falling asleep and of awakening, begin and end of an imaginary quasi-life is not an Übergangsphänomen in the real life of a subject; imagining while remaining actively involved in real life, is different from dreaming when one sleeps; the contrast between the life of a wakeful real-ego and of a phantasy-ego is not experienced, by inner consciousness, in the same way as is the double life of a real sleeper who sets the scenery for the illusory lives of dream-egos in dream-worlds.

  6. Cf. Hua III, 1, § 24, p. 51: “Am Prinzip aller Prinzipien: daß […] alles, was sich uns in der ‚Intuition‘ originär […] darbietet, einfach hinzunehmen sei, als was es sich gibt, aber auch nur in den Schranken, in denen es sich da gibt, kann uns keine erdenkliche Theorie irre machen.”

  7. For full references to the Husserliana series, please see the shared bibliography, at the end of the guest editors’ introduction, for the Husserl Studies special issue this paper is part of.

Work cited

For full references to the Husserliana series, please see the shared bibliography, at the end of the guest editors’ introduction, for the Husserl Studies special issue this paper is part of.

  • Bernet, R. (2005). Real Time and Imaginary Time: On the Husserlian Conception of Temporal Individuation. In G. Banham (Ed.), Husserl and the Logic of Experience (pp. 217–236). London/New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank the anonymous reviewer for his or her valuable suggestions, and also John B. Brough, whose work has remained his constant source of inspiration for several decades

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rudolf Bernet.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bernet, R. Mapping the Imagination: Distinct Acts, Objects, and Modalities. Husserl Stud 36, 213–226 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10743-020-09272-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10743-020-09272-9

Navigation