It is part of the essence of the intellective act to be consciousness of objectivity

One need not, however, think about actually existing things at all. A
perception can be a respectable, whole perception, subjectively 153
characterized just like any other perception, but it can be that the
object does not exist at all, or that it indeed exists, but is not at all in

35 reality the way it appears there. According to the usual view, almost
universally taught by natural scientists, not even a single, normal
sensory perception is supposed to correspond to things existing in
themselves. In sensory qualities as a whole, every one is supposed to




be a merely subjective appearance. And so, we have countless intuitive
and conceptual thought acts that are objectless. Objectless, insofar as
the objects that are presented and thought there do not exist at all.
And yet, not objectless insofar as a consciousness of an object is

5 present in all of them. In hallucination, an object is present “before
our eyes”; in false judgment, a mental state of affairs believed. In
each case, the acts that we call thought acts, therefore, refer to
things. It is part of the essence of the intellective act to be
consciousness of objectivity. But, how is that to be understood? And,
how is one to

10 understand the difference between acts whose intended objects exist
in reality and acts in which objects are intended, but do not really
exist? How is it in general to be understood that we speak of existing


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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