Fascinating! This article is skillfully composed and proposes its ideas well. I can tell you studied these philosophies well, if not expertly, and I congratulate you for your superb understanding of the subject matter and for your ability to formulate certain ideas in pleasantly casual language. The entire article, especially its introduction and summary, was excellent. Personally, I understood each body paragraph better as I progressed through it, learning the philosophy gradually as a whole rather than seeking to understand each bit of information individually and then trying to piece them all together, and it might be helpful to state that as a disclaimer to average readers who might otherwise be deterred by the plethora of seemingly complex philosophical thoughts and terminology. Also, a little more clarity could be used in your explanations of the terminology and how each term relates to another. Overall, however, I really appreciated the knowledge I gained from this article, and I would rate it 4.5 stars. I would be interested in an elaboration on how “Descartes … after he realizes the Cartesian division … misses the chance to start phenomenology”. I don’t think his “famous ‘cogito, ergo sum,’ the ‘I think, therefore I am’” is relative in this case, for phenomenology also must affirm the existence of the self, since something, that is, the self, must experience phenomena for the phenomena to be experienced and therefore exist. Perhaps it would be better phrased as “I experience, therefore I am”. Also, I look forward to reading more philosophical summary articles if you plan to write more, which I suspect you indeed plan to do. A continuation on the philosophy of Heidegger’s Being and Time would be interesting, as, I’m sure, would be a variety of other philosophical topics in which you’re interested. Thanks for the good read!