by Schütz
[Tiresias, or Our Knowledge of Future Events: Section I]: Schütz uses the mythological figure of Tiresias to explore the paradoxes of a finite mind possessing perfect knowledge of the future. He distinguishes between experiencing the future as an ongoing flux of becoming versus an anticipated retrospection (future perfect tense). The section concludes that a seer's knowledge, unlike human knowledge, is problematic because it lacks a clear mechanism for selection, relevance, or connection to a socialized world. [The Structure of the Lebenswelt and Commonsense Anticipation]: The author shifts from the fictitious consciousness of Tiresias to the 'Lebenswelt' (lifeworld) of ordinary human beings. He identifies three major differences: humans use a preorganized stock of knowledge, they are personally interested in and affected by their anticipations, and their world is socialized and shared with others. This social congruency allows for reliable common-sense predictions about social and natural events. [Typification, Idealization, and the Flux of Knowledge]: Schütz examines how the 'stock of knowledge at hand' is structured by relevance and typification. He discusses Husserl's idealizations of 'and so forth' and 'I can do it again,' which allow humans to assume the world's structure will remain constant. He argues that while we anticipate types of events, the unique reality of an event only becomes clear in hindsight, creating a necessary discrepancy between expectation and fulfillment. [Scientific Prediction vs. Commonsense Anticipation]: A brief comparison between common-sense anticipation and scientific prediction. Schütz notes that scientific knowledge is more homogeneous and governed by specific rules of procedure and verification, yet it remains 'certainty until further notice' (Gewissheit bis auf Widerruf). [Human Action and the Future Perfect Tense]: Schütz analyzes human action as a process based on a preconceived project. He introduces the concept of 'modo futuri exacti,' where an actor anticipates an act as if it were already accomplished in the future perfect tense. This projecting unifies the 'specious present' and is guided by a hierarchy of interests and plans, though it lacks mathematical objective probability. [Conclusion: Foresight as Anticipated Hindsight]: The essay concludes by contrasting human foresight with Tiresias's divine seercraft. Schütz argues that human foresight is essentially 'anticipated hindsight' based on past typicalities, leaving open horizons that only reality can fill. He ends with a Platonic reference suggesting that humans often do not know what is truly good for them, requiring a prayer for divine guidance to avert mistaken desires.
Schütz uses the mythological figure of Tiresias to explore the paradoxes of a finite mind possessing perfect knowledge of the future. He distinguishes between experiencing the future as an ongoing flux of becoming versus an anticipated retrospection (future perfect tense). The section concludes that a seer's knowledge, unlike human knowledge, is problematic because it lacks a clear mechanism for selection, relevance, or connection to a socialized world.
Read full textThe author shifts from the fictitious consciousness of Tiresias to the 'Lebenswelt' (lifeworld) of ordinary human beings. He identifies three major differences: humans use a preorganized stock of knowledge, they are personally interested in and affected by their anticipations, and their world is socialized and shared with others. This social congruency allows for reliable common-sense predictions about social and natural events.
Read full textSchütz examines how the 'stock of knowledge at hand' is structured by relevance and typification. He discusses Husserl's idealizations of 'and so forth' and 'I can do it again,' which allow humans to assume the world's structure will remain constant. He argues that while we anticipate types of events, the unique reality of an event only becomes clear in hindsight, creating a necessary discrepancy between expectation and fulfillment.
Read full textA brief comparison between common-sense anticipation and scientific prediction. Schütz notes that scientific knowledge is more homogeneous and governed by specific rules of procedure and verification, yet it remains 'certainty until further notice' (Gewissheit bis auf Widerruf).
Read full textSchütz analyzes human action as a process based on a preconceived project. He introduces the concept of 'modo futuri exacti,' where an actor anticipates an act as if it were already accomplished in the future perfect tense. This projecting unifies the 'specious present' and is guided by a hierarchy of interests and plans, though it lacks mathematical objective probability.
Read full textThe essay concludes by contrasting human foresight with Tiresias's divine seercraft. Schütz argues that human foresight is essentially 'anticipated hindsight' based on past typicalities, leaving open horizons that only reality can fill. He ends with a Platonic reference suggesting that humans often do not know what is truly good for them, requiring a prayer for divine guidance to avert mistaken desires.
Read full text