TY - JOUR
T1 - Does an Ontic Whole Exist?
T2 - Conditions of Possibility and Technology Use
AU - de Boer, Bas
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. part of Springer Nature.
PY - 2022/12
Y1 - 2022/12
N2 - In this commentary, I scrutinize Coeckelbergh’s criticism of postphenomenology, and question whether postphenomenology indeed tends to neglect the social dimension of technology use (ontic), and must necessarily be conceived as being in opposition to transcendental philosophy (ontological). Second, I suggest that the Wittgensteinian concepts that Coeckelbergh introduces are interesting additions to the concepts used in postphenomenology, but that his use of the term “transcendental” seems up to now primarily to be a rhetorical means enabling him to distance himself from postphenomenology.
AB - In this commentary, I scrutinize Coeckelbergh’s criticism of postphenomenology, and question whether postphenomenology indeed tends to neglect the social dimension of technology use (ontic), and must necessarily be conceived as being in opposition to transcendental philosophy (ontological). Second, I suggest that the Wittgensteinian concepts that Coeckelbergh introduces are interesting additions to the concepts used in postphenomenology, but that his use of the term “transcendental” seems up to now primarily to be a rhetorical means enabling him to distance himself from postphenomenology.
KW - Empirical philosophy
KW - Philosophy of technology
KW - Postphenomenology
KW - Transcendental turn
KW - 2023 OA procedure
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85140678435&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10699-020-09751-4
DO - 10.1007/s10699-020-09751-4
M3 - Comment/Letter to the editor
AN - SCOPUS:85140678435
SN - 1233-1821
VL - 27
SP - 1401
EP - 1407
JO - Foundations of science
JF - Foundations of science
IS - 4
ER -