Husserl's phenomenology

[vir litterarum]

Having discovered how influential Husserl and his conception of phenomenology has been on the history of Continental philosophy, I would like to read at least one of his works. Does anyone know which of his works provides the best and most holistic representation of his theory of phenomenology?

[modus.irrealis]

I long ago read (parts of) his Logical Investigations and his Philosophy of Arithmetic, and they were relatively accessible, although my interest was in his thoughts on logic and mathematics and I'm not sure if he influenced continental philosophy in those areas (many of the problems he treats are problems of analytic philosophy that continental philosophy seems to ignore). But in any case, Husserl is one of those philosophers that I find easier to read about than to read (like Kant or Wittgenstein, whose own works I can't really appreciate, but reading about him makes the reasons for their influence clear), but of course, that might be different with someone else.

[vir litterarum]

thanks for the suggestion. I have been reading some later Continental philosophers lately such as Nietzsche and Derrida and have been struggling to comprehend some ideas and terms that seem to have acquired a specific technical meaning such as
"intentionality" and "economy," so I decided I should probably read Husserl and other earlier philosophers working in the Continental tradition before I try to read any more Derrida or Nietzsche.

[MiguelM]

Husserl is very important for Heidegger (who in turn is fundamental for Derrida). But you can probably read Nietzsche, being as he is chronologically anterior, without losing on context. Nietzsche is one of those authors who doesn't really have much of a technical vocabulary, and the one he does have is seldom kept beyond the one book he may be using it at the time. He is obviously more than fundamental for those philosophers you're mentioning, but not for technical usage of terms, I'd say.

Instead, what might prove fundamental is Hegel. But then you have to read Kant, and Leibniz, and Spinoza, and Aquinas, and Plato and oh where does it end?!

[vir litterarum]

That's precisely my problem. Continental philosophy and literary theory are only secondary pursuits for me behind Latin and Greek, but it seems as though it is nearly impossible to study any contemporary theorists or philosophers without starting at the beginning, a course of study which demands a significant investment of time and rumination in its own right. Although I hate relying on secondary sources and insipid introductions and overviews, it seems I may be forced to at least until I finish graduate school.