Why does Husserl split consciousness into Noesis and Noema?

by ocean.flynn

Question by justaguyinthecrowd: Why does Husserl split consciousness into Noesis and Noema?
I see he does it–

but why does he do it to begin with?

Is it because those are the building blocks of consciousness?

I am a little confused, any insights?

Best answer:

Answer by j153e
Pure Ego is Plotinian One Mind Soul and One Mind Soul-individuation.

A single distinction within One Mind Soul-individuation is that of Mind, the noetic, regarding physis, or the noema. Soul, individuating, re-cognizes or thinks Mind-thought re physis, noema.

Consciousness in Vipassana meditation is similar to Husserlian phenomenology: a rising or harmonizing within protocols insuring purity of awareness, toward types of subject-object unity. At level of Buddha Mind, at level of Atman, at level of One Mind Soul-individuation, at level of Pure Ego, there obtains certain multiplicities within Unity.

Outpicturing subject-object awareness, lessening of Vipassana awareness, descending the Jacobean ladder of Immanuel or Wittgenstein’s ladder re world as case, is the case for human (Heideggerian Daseinic) awareness: at this level of metaphysics, the Kantian synthetic a priori of subject-object has formed, as existing outside of the more fluidic aspect of the One. In order to do business, Husserl described this synthetic a priority within the frame of his post-Kantian “future metaphysics”–in which Noesis and Noema categorize Mindfulness qua Pure Ego, and the lesser, Kantian 5-sense data stream subject-object. This is similar to the frame of Whitehead’s Monad-Dyad-Triad process, in which Monadic Pure Ego projects Dyad into physis, with some distinct hope of Triadic sublimation or increase of Monadic Nb that Hegel’s critique of Kant: that Kierkegaard didn’t go far enough with his awareness–is answered by Husserl in this wise.

“A Philosophy of Universality,” O. M. Aivanhov,
“Nihilism,” Father Seraphim Rose, and
“Philosophy as Metanoetics,” Tanabe (student of Husserl and Heidegger), and
“The Path of the Higher Self,” Mark Prophet, deal with this in varying modes.

Reviews at http://www.amazon.com

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!