Husserl and the crisis of cultureABSTRACT: The theme of the crisis of culture has been common among philosophers whose thought developed at the beginning of the 20th century, and especially among those who they lived through the difficult moments of the period between the two wars. Husserl was no exception. I intend in this article a modest approach to the development of this subject in the founder of phenomenology. I will try to: (1) delimit what Husserl meant by culture; (2) identify the reasons for the crisis of culture; and (3) find a solution to this crisis. The following communication will consist of three sections. In the first, which will play the lion's share, I will try to limit what Husserl means by culture both in its descriptive and normative sense. In the second we will see why what he refers to with this term is, in his opinion, in crisis. Finally, and in a very short third part, we will try to explain the path that, according to Husserl, it is necessary to undertake to find a way out of such a situation of cultural crisis.1. The double definition of culture in Husserl: description and normativeness I believe that it is not a bad strategy when dealing with what Husserl means by culture, starting from the ontological bipartition that he makes of the world into nature (Natur) and spirit (Geist). There are many places where it is talked about extensively. Making a brief summary of the topic, we could say that the scope of nature is that of material things, that of entities seen from pure space-time exteriority, the law according to which they are governed by causal necessity. On the contrary, the world of the spirit is one in which the essential is not given by the cause-external relationships that exist between objects, but by the human meaning that constitutes our first and primordial contact with reality. The world of the spirit, that is, is the world of meaning, of meaning, what properly constitutes our cosmos and is given to us, in the first instance, as a gift by our ancestors. Such a world can only arise from the ego and its life of consciousness, or rather from an ego (I do not enter here into the distinction ego, man, person, transcendental subjectivity) and from a life of consciousness which are always in constant interrelation. with others.