Phenomenology: The Basics Paperback – 17 Oct. 2018

This is by far the best introduction to phenomenology that one can find. It is extremely well written, and it combines depth with conceptual clarity. Strongly recommended to all those who really want to understands the basics of phenomenology.

Very concisely written. Just what you need to grasp the basics of Phenomenology. I would recommend.

This is a clear and concise introduction not so much to the history of phenomenology, but rather to what it means to employ the phenomenological method. As such I would deem this a far superior read to many of the other books on the market.

A good attempt at explaining a very difficult subject

Does his best to explain but I still got lost a third of the way in. The 'practical analysis' seems equally as theoretical as previous chapters. Still, I'm inspired to go through it again.

This is an attempt to showing some key ideas in regard to the subject but it is not inspirational in its writing style. Its discussions are dry.

It seemed to repeat the same point which can be confusing which incapacitated the flow as it forces you to search for nuances in each subsequent paragraph. The arguments weren't presented so clearly or convincingly and their was a lot of listing of questions or arbitrarily placed examples which again confused matters. The topic can be a bit abstruse and I am new to researching phenomenology so I will have to study further but I gained more from online lectures.

Rather disappointed with this, which seems rather inconsistently pitched: at times a bit laboured, but at others seeming to skip through what seem to me really key manoeuvres with (for me at least) insufficient support. I wanted to get the basics. That's my level. But this seems to be very Husserl heavy, to the extent that when say Heidegger or Merleau-Ponty are mentioned or quoted, it seems to be generally to support what is really Zahivi's exposition of Husserl's ideas, and often times those quotes don't quite seem to make the points Zahavi's argument really needs them to. Chapter 2 on intentionality is a key chapter, but for me one of the weakest, and I wonder whether this sometimes has to do with the fact that Zahivi is not writing in his first language (good though his English undoubtedly is). The critique of representation is particularly difficult to follow (I've read it 4+ times and still don't get it). Likewise his explanation of constitution (which kind or replaces the idea of representation) is rather less clear and full than for me it really needed to be. It is, it seems "the process that permits that which is constituted to... present itself as what it is". Clearly a lot hangs on the difference between something being "presented" and it being "represented", but I'm not very clear from Zahavi what this is, or why it matters so much.