So
far, we found two points in Kimura’s view on subjectivity, both of which are
influenced by Viktor von Weizsäcker.
(1) The most basic type of subjectivity is not found in the
consciousness or transcendental ego (in the Husserlian sense), but in the
Gestaltkreis of the living organism. A living organism maintains itself as a
subject in its relation to the surrounding environment through movement and
perception. The subject keeps its coherence through coping with environmental
changes.
(2) The subjectivity of living organism involves the fundamental relation
(Grundverhältnis) with the life itself. The life appears through particular
living organisms but is beyond them in itself, never to be recognized as such
in an objective way. Instead, each organism “lives” the life by means of its
body, where the subjectivity is situated. This subjectivity is ahead of
self-reflection.
And
now, he takes up the experience of music ensemble as an example, in order to
expand his consideration from the subjectivity to the intersubjectivity.
First,
he distinguishes “the noetic” and “the noematic” of our
experience of playing music. What he refers to as “the noetic”, different from
the Husserl’s “noesis”, is not the intentional act of consciousness but the very
action of creating music. He terms it “noetic”, because our action toward the
world (not limited to the music) involves the pre-reflective intentionality of
the living body.
On the other hand, to produce the each sound as an
integrated melody, we need the feedback from recalling the already sounded part
(retention), as well as the feedforward from anticipating the yet to be
sounded part (protention). The whole perception of listening, which
changes from moment to moment, leads the players movement of making each sound.
What comes into our awareness through perception that unfolds itself in
temporality is called “the noematic”. It is not very far from Husserl’s notion
of “noema”.
0 Comments