Wittgensteinian Ethnomethodology (1): Gurwitsch, Garfinkel, and Wittgenstein and the Meaning of Praxeological Gestalts

Garfinkel’s Ethnomethodology (EM) at its core involves a praxeological, or interactional, respecification of Gestalt phenomena. In early EM, this is pursued through the development category praxeological Gestalten in which social facts (or units) are respecified as phenomena, where members constituents and unit whole Gestalt, produced praxeologically by methodic work members. later work, Garfinkel would transpose traditional perceptual such music, to explore interactional done production perception those developing EM reconfiguring Gestaltism, drew on constitutive phenomenology Aron Gurwitsch, wherein Gurwitsch sought integrate Psychology phenomenology. drawing while also being informed Schütz and, later, Merleau-Ponty, often depicted either heavily indebted distinct type phenomenology: phenomenology, perhaps. At same time, parallels have been drawn between Ludwig Wittgenstein’s since Studies was published 1967. The centred treatment rules rule-following similarities meaning work. However, given centrality psychology it worth noting that his manuscripts Wittgenstein discussed phenomena extensively ways anticipate what do with Gestaltist ideas. It is, therefore, exploring differences Wittgenstein’s, Gurwitsch’s engagement Gestaltism. This I seek article. conclusion, propose should be seen, like Wittgenstein, post-phenomenological.