how the attainment of knowledge is to be understood

The first reflections we engaged in seemed to require basing theory of
knowledge on psychology. Generally speaking, the 5 problems were: how
the ideality of the meaning unit and how the being in itself of the
meant and allegedly known objectivity manifest themselves in the
subjectivity of cognitive acts, acts of presenting, judging, supposing,
etc.; how the attainment of knowledge is to be understood; correlatively
to that, what the being for itself of known 10 objectivity means and
truth’s being valid in itself. These problems relate to all kinds and
forms of cognitive acts, of meanings, and objectivities, and they relate
to all the so-called principles to which cognizing thinking is to be
subject from the ontological and noetic standpoint. Subjectivity is
already involved everywhere in the posing 15 of the problem. How was
psychology not to be a basis of theory of 175 knowledge?

Edmund Husserl, INTRODUCTION TO LOGIC AND THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE, 172

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s