In the following study of the differences between Kant and Husserl, Ricoeur endeavors to determine which elements of Husserlian phenomenology can be found in Kantian thought, and how Kant's critique of knowledge and his determination of its limits affect the Husserlian postulation of the existence of “the other.”

In the following tribute, Merleau-Ponty attempts to find some of the “unthought thoughts” regarding nature, consciousness, and existence which can be generated by Husserl's thought.

In the following essay, Bonomi explores the influence of Husserl's phenomenological principles and methods on the theory and practice of the grammatical analysis of language.

In the following essay, Spiegelberg compares the phenomenological philosophies of Husserl and Charles Sanders Peirce, and explores the extent of each philosopher's awareness of and influence upon the other's work.

In the following essay, Schuetz explores the way Husserl uses the operative concepts of type and eidos (or essential property) in his study of perception.

In the following excerpt, Farber traces the precursors to and outlines the development of Husserl's philosophy.

In the following essay, Golomb explains the distinctions Husserl makes between psychology and psychologism, and between positivistic and phenomenological psychology, and analyzes the significance of these differences in the development of phenomenology and for the practice of psychology.

In the following essay, Leiss discusses the relevance of Husserl's thought to the problem of how we understand science, the natural world, and the relation of the two, especially with regard to the concept of “mastery over nature.”

In the following essay, Hook presents an expository critique of Husserl's “Phenomenological Idealism.”

In this comparison of Marxism and phenomenology, originally presented as a lecture in 1972, Wartofsky shows the errors of phenomenology from the Marxist point of view.

In the following essay, Adorno examines the meaning of idealism in Husserl's thought, and the problems it poses with regard to thinking and knowing.

In the following essay, Shmuelli explores the degree to which Husserl's phenomenology and Marx's dialectical analysis are and are not compatible approaches to confronting alienation and establishing social change.

In the following essay, Schmitt challenges the grounds of phenomenology by calling into question Husserl's distinction between the transcendental and the mundane, and, therefore, the validity of the “phenomenological reduction.”

In the following essay, McGill describes Husserl's phenomenological mapping of time in contrast to the models provided by Henri Bergson, J. M. E. McTaggart, and Bertrand Russell.

In the following lecture, originally delivered in 1959, Gurwitsch distinguishes Husserl's conception of consciousness from earlier formulations by Locke, Hume, Leibnitz, and Kant.

In the following essay, Beck criticizes the direction Husserl takes in his last work, arguing that he abandons the methods and principles upon which he first founded phenomenology.

In the following essay, Spiegelberg discusses the relationship between phenomenology and existentialism.

In the following excerpt, Farber illustrates the aim of phenomenology and the method Husserl uses in his phenomenological analysis of time-consciousness.

In the following essay, Seeburger explores Heidegger's relation to the Husserlian formulation of phenomenology through an analysis of Heidegger's understanding of the “phenomenological reduction.”

In the following review of two books on aspects of Husserl's thought, Sokolowski provides a comprehensive view of the state of the understanding of Husserl's thought at the end of the twentieth century.

In the following essay, Cairns challenges Hook's critique of Husserl.