I've read Merleau-Ponty's commentary on Husserl's phenomenology and want to see how well I can explain it without looking at it.

What would you like to see happen in this conversation? I’ve read Merleau-Ponty’s commentary on Husserl’s phenomenology and want to see how well I can explain it without looking at it. What kind of “hussar” is this “hussar”? A philosopher famous for his phenomenology, who, according to Merleau-Ponty, introduced the discussion of language, which was not so mainstream in the philosophical genealogy. What kind of “Merlot Ponti” is this “Merlot Ponti”? Merleau-Ponty is also famous for his philosophy on language, the contrast between institutionalized language and the language that is being born. Is there anything else you can tell us about this “Merlo Ponti”? Now I want to talk about Hussar. What is it that you value? I would like to verify the extent of my understanding of Husserl by answering the question. Is there anything else you can tell us about this “hussar”? Early on, I was interested in the unifying nature of language, but later I came to believe that language becomes a unified system when people try to use it to express themselves.

• Merleau-Ponty is also famous for his philosophy about language, the contrast between institutionalized language and the language that is being born.

• Where is this “Merlo Ponti” located? 👎 Merlo Ponti

• I would like to verify how well I understand Husserl by answering the question.

• How do you know this “hussar”? I read the commentary. What kind of “read” is that “read”? I chopped and arrayed them in Kozaneba, this as an experiment in assisting the process of reading.

• I would like to verify how well I understand Husserl by answering the question.

• What do you hope will happen regarding this “hussar”? I hope that now that I know a lot about Husserl, I’ll read Heidegger next. What needs to happen to the “hussar” for that to happen? Hussar will never change, so I hope I can answer your questions. As for “hussar,” can it be done? I’d like to do a test to see if I can answer that question.

• Hussar will never change, so hopefully I can answer your question.

• Where is this “hussar” located? Listen first. Yes, sir. Let’s see, if we consider that language is the accidental result of various past events, it is incomprehensible that it should be a unified system of meaning, it would be chaos! Hussar.” And so, instead, we approach a unified system by trying to express what people want to say about themselves. Hussar.” Well, I can’t explain it anymore, I don’t understand much. Hussar.” the end What would you like to see happen in this conversation? I wanted to verify how much I understood, but it was still hard to explain without seeing anything. What kind of “verify” is that “verify”? If you understand enough, the words will come out, if not, you don’t understand yet.

• Hussar will never change, so hopefully I can answer your question.

• Where is this “hussar” located? That’s before Merleau-Ponty. What is it that you value? You’re talking about why I’m trying to understand Husserl, because Eugene Gendlin’s ideas were very much in line with my practical purpose, which was to focus on how to put the unverbalized into language, so I was studying that, and I was studying the Merleau-Ponty text that he was introducing me to. I ordered and read the Merleau-Ponty text that he was referring to, and it was a commentary on Husserl and then a development of Husserl’s commentary, so I decided to experiment with that as a test bed and try to use Kozaneba to go through the process of reading and understanding a difficult book. What does that “hussar” look like? It’s a source, I don’t know if it’s useful per se, Eugene Gendlin and Merleau-Ponty both developed a lot of things based on Husserl’s story, so it would be good to know where it’s Husserl-derived. Where does this “hussar” come from? I was interested in it because Eugene Gendlin introduced it, and I originally went through my “phenomenology” thinking “hmm, I don’t know, it doesn’t seem useful for my life”, but I’m finding out that it’s actually quite relevant in regards to my current interests.

• You’re asking why I’m trying to understand Husserl, because Eugene Gendlin’s ideas were very much in line with my practical purpose, which was to focus on how to put the unverbalized into language, so I was studying that, and he was introducing me to Merleau-Ponty’s writing. I ordered and read the Merleau-Ponty text that he was referring to, and it was a commentary on Husserl and then a development of Husserl’s commentary, so I decided to experiment with that as a test bed and try to use Kozaneba to go through the process of reading and understanding a difficult book.

• What “language” is this “language”? Language used as a means of expressing what you want to express What is the relationship between its “language” and “hussar”? Husserl paid a lot of attention to language, rather philosophy is the beneficiary of language. Is that “language” the same as “Hussar”? Is it different? not match the correct (answer, etc.)

• Husserl paid a lot of attention to language, rather philosophy is the beneficiary of language

• Is there anything else you can tell us about this “language”? Language Encompassing Philosophy? What happens to the “hussar” when its “language”? The philosophy he does is itself done using language, a process that Merleau-Ponty argues should be repeated What is the connection between its “language” and “hussar”? Ummm, I don’t know.

• The philosophy he does is itself done using language, a process that Merleau-Ponty argues should be repeated

• Where can I find this “Merlo Ponti”? Between Hussar and Eugene Gendlin What is the relationship between this “Eugene Gendlin” and “Hussar”? So Eugene Gendlin himself tried to formalize philosophically the concepts that Carl Rogers was using practically, and then he realized that half of it was phenomenology, and he put one foot in Husserl! Is that “Eugene Gendlin” the same as “Hussar”? Is it different? not match the correct (answer, etc.)

• The philosophy he does is itself done using language, a process that Merleau-Ponty argues should be repeated

• How do you know this “Merlo Ponti”? Maybe you should read the rest of the article and figure out Merleau-Ponty’s argument. What is the relationship between this “Merleau-Ponty” and “Hussar”? Yes, so far I don’t see the difference between Merleau-Ponty’s and Husserl’s arguments, I don’t think they are equal, but what is the difference? Is that “Merleau-Ponty” the same as “Hussar”? Is it the same as “Merleau-Ponty”? They should be different, but I can’t tell the difference right now.

• Yes, so far I don’t see the difference between Merleau-Ponty’s and Husserl’s arguments, I don’t think they are equal, but what is the difference?

• Where does this “Merlo Ponti” come from? How did I know that? The engineer’s intellectual production techniques mentioned it.

• Yes, so far I don’t see the difference between Merleau-Ponty’s and Husserl’s arguments, I don’t think they are equal, but what is the difference?

• What does this “Merlo Ponti” look like? I don’t know.

• The philosophy he does is itself done using language, a process that Merleau-Ponty argues should be repeated

• Where is this “language” located?

https://keicho.netlify.app/#talk=ryIQ1Vrjd2rXf1wKg8s4 #KeichobotLog

This page is auto-translated from /nishio/メルロポンティによるフッサールの現象学の解説を読んだので見ないでどの程度説明できるか試したい using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.