The Problem of Transcendentalist “Adaptation” of the Principle of Ultimate Justification: Transcendental Pragmatics vs Transcendental Phenomenology

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2025-31-1-12

Keywords:

ultimate justification, reflection, transcendental pragmatics, phenomenology, metaphysics, conditions of possibility, self-contradiction, consciousness, the given

Abstract

The article investigates the conditions and limits of a transcendental reinterpretation of the principle of ultimate (final) justification, carried out within Apel’s philosophical project (where this principle acquires the status of a methodological center), in contrast to the phenomenological version of the transcendental “adaptation” of the idea of Letztbegründung. The author reveals a certain contradiction between the fundamental parameters of transcendental thought (clearly and rigorously represented in phenomenological discourse) and the principle of ultimate justification, which, despite the radicalism of Apel’s attempt at its rethinking in transcendental vein, still remains metaphysically founded. By comparing the transcendental-pragmatic and transcendental-phenomenological approaches to the problem of ultimate justification, she shows that the seemingly metaphysical implications of the phenomenological version of the discourse of ultimate (final) justification are compensated by a number of authentically transcendental moments, primarily such as the splitting of the “instance” of Letztbegründung into consciousness and the given, as well as the non-substantiality of consciousness, which, accordingly, cannot claim the status of ultimate (final) in a metaphysical sense. Alongside the metaphysical foundations of Apel’s thematization of ultimate justification, the author also identifies its pragmatic implications: first and foremost, the primacy of effectiveness and orientation towards results, thus the presumption of feasibility, and therefore completeness, finality – in contrast to the ultimate criticality, reflexivity, and possibilitness as dominant traits of the transcendental attitude. In the course of the comparative analysis, the paper reveals and proves that, while phenomenological discourse includes the ideas of ground and justification, but subordinates them to genuinely transcendental factors, Apel’s approach subordinates the methodological resources crucial for transcendentalism (reflexivity, inquiry into conditions of possibility, self-reference) to the principle of ultimate justification as a kind of “principle of principles” of transcendental pragmatics, which remains rooted in a metaphysical attitude.

Author Biography

Anna Ilyina, H. Skovoroda Institute of Philosophy, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

Doctor of Science in Philosophy, Senior Research Fellow of the Department of History of Foreign Philosophy.
Research interests: Transcendental philosophy, Phenomenology, Philosophy of deconstruction.

References

Apel, K.-O. (1972). The a Priori of Communication and the Foundation of the Humanities. Man and World, 5, 3-37. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01253016

Apel, K.-O. (1975). The problem of Philosophical Fundamental-Grounding in Light of a Transcendental Pragmatic of Language (K. R. Pavlovic, trans.). Man and World, 8(3), 239-275. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01255646

Apel, K.-O. (1978). Transcendental Semiotics and the Paradigms of First Philosophy. Philosophic Exchange, 9(1), 3-22.

Apel, K.-O. (1993). Can an Ultimate Foundation of Knowledge Be Non-Metaphysical? (B. Gregg, trans.). The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 7(3), 171-190.

Aßländer, M. S. (Ed.) ( 2011). Handbuch Wirtschaftsethik. Stuttgart, Weimar: Verlag J. B. Metzler.

Berghofer, Ph. (2018) Husserl’s Conception of Experiential Justification: What It Is and Why It Matters. Husserlian Studies, 34,145-170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10743- 018-9225-8

Berghofer, Ph. (2020). Husserl’s Project of Ultimate Elucidation and the Principle of All Principles. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 50(3), 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1017/ can.2019.40

Biesta, G. (1998). The Right to Philosophy of Education: From Critique to Deconstruction. Philosophy of Education Archive, 476-484.

Biesta, G. J. J., Stams, G. J. J. M. (2001). Critical Thinking and the Question of Critique: Some Lessons from Deconstruction. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 20(1), 57-74. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005290910306

Guenther, L. (2021). Six Senses of Critique for Critical Phenomenology. Puncta, 2(4), 5-23. https://doi.org/10.5399/pjcp.v4i2.2

Hintikka, J. (2003). The Notion of Intuition in Husserl. Revue internationale de philosophie, 224(2), 57-79. https://doi.org/10.3917/rip.224.0057

Ilyina, A. (2016). Idea of Evidence in Phenomenological Outlook: Deconstruction and Reactualization of Cartesian Legacy First article: Excessiveness of Evidence. [In Ukrainian]. Sententiae, 2(XXXV), 23-40. https://doi.org/10.22240/sent35.02.023

Ilyina, A. (2019). Derrida as an Object of the History of Philosophy: the Concept of Aporia in Terms of the Universality Problem. [In Ukrainian]. Sententiae, 38(1), 6-26. https://doi.org/10.22240/sent38.01.006

Ilyina, A. (2020). Transcendentalism Par Excellence: Deconstructive Outlook. Kyiv: Interservis. [In Ukrainian].

Ilyina, A. (2024). Transcendental and Normative Critique: Convergence or Opposition? [In Ukrainian]. Philosophy of Education, 30(2), 83-109. https://doi.org/10.31874/2309- 1606-2024-30-2-6

Karachevtseva, L. (2019). The Dispute on Philosophical Normativism in the Context of the Problem of Rational Grounding: Hans Albert versus Wolfgang Kuhlmann. [In Ukrainian]. Filosofska Dumka, 5, 64-68.

Kettner, M. (2018). Pragmatism and Ultimate Justification. In: H. Brunkhorst, R. Kreide & C. Lafont (Eds.), The Habermas Handbook (pp. 43-48). New York: Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/brun16642-006

Paitlová, J. (2021). Hans Albert’s Systematic Approach to Critical Rationalism. Homo Oeconomicus, 39(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41412-021-00107-2

Papastephanou, M. (1997). Communicative Action and Philosophical Foundations: Comments on the Apel-Habermas Debate. Philosophy and Social Criticism, 23(4), 41-69. https://doi.org/10.1177/019145379702300403

Pihlström, S. (2023). Realism, Value, and Transcendental Arguments between Neopragmatism and Analytic Philosophy. Nature Switzerland: Springer. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-031-28042-9

Tur, M. (2004). Ultimate Grounding in Transcendental Philosophy: Main Complications and Ways to Overcome Them. (Article 1). [In Ukrainian]. Sententiae, 2(XI), 18-28.

Yermolenko, A. (1999). Communicative Practical Philosophy. Kyiv: Libra. [In Ukrainian].

Yermolenko, A. (2016). Renascence of Philosophical Culture from the World of Translation. [In Ukrainian]. Filosofska Dumka, 5, 78-93.

Downloads

Abstract views: 11

Published

2025-09-04

How to Cite

Ilyina, A. (2025). The Problem of Transcendentalist “Adaptation” of the Principle of Ultimate Justification: Transcendental Pragmatics vs Transcendental Phenomenology. Filosofiya Osvity. Philosophy of Education, 31(1), 193–220. https://doi.org/10.31874/2309-1606-2025-31-1-12

Issue

Section

Articles

Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.