Note: this assignment is for students in Group IV only.
The assignment is due Thurs., Feb. 3.
Please submit by e-mail to me.
Please respond to the following question in
approximately two pages (double spaced). (Needless to say this should
be your own original work.)
In the third paragraph of §20 of the Fifth Logical
Investigation (in last week's reading), Husserl says that acts' having
the ``same content'' -- that is, the same matter -- can't be reduced
to their having the same ``intentional object.'' Based on the reason
he gives there, how might he have wanted to modify that conclusion
later? See especially Ideas §§88 and 89. In what sense does
having the same ``noematic'' object indeed mean having the same
content (same ``matter,'' in the sense of the Logical
Investigations)? What has changed in between?