Viewed objectively the Phenomenology fragments into isolated disciplinary data

Evidence

Nor, on the other hand, is the Phenomenology ultimately any more satisfying when examined from the objective point of view, where it seems to fall apart into a series of random observations and analyses, historical notes, psychological, philosophical, scientific, artistic data which would have to be analyzed separately by the various disciplines in question before their validity could be assumed. — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 104

Categorization

• XREF: This frames the two poles Jameson holds in dialectical tension his whole career: existential-phenomenological (Sartre) vs. objective-structural (Althusser). This paragraph sets up the book’s own method. — connects to: Hegel’s Phenomenology lacks any unity of point of view — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 104; Friedman’s methodology resists tidy philosophical classification — Donald MacKenzie, An Engine, Not a Camera: How Financial…, 55; Philosophical interpretation reorganizes minute scientific details without exceeding their range (+3 more)
• yield-rescued: below the book’s yield-target cutoff, included anyway for connecting to: Hegel’s Phenomenology lacks any unity of point of view — Fredric Jameson, Marxism and Form, 104; Friedman’s methodology resists tidy philosophical classification — Donald MacKenzie, An Engine, Not a Camera: How Financial…, 55; Philosophical interpretation reorganizes minute scientific details without exceeding their range (+3 more)

Broader Connections

• Computational humanities analysis depends on biased choices about what counts as data #complicates (0.76) — Andrew deWaard, Derivative Media, 325
• Phenomenology studies lived experience rather than reality-versus-appearance puzzles #complicates (0.72) — Sarah Bakewell, At the Existentialist Café, 11