Key Arguments

• Husserl states the fundamental correlation: "Manifestly, in the case of an object so constituted, its abiding existence and being-thus are a correlate of the habituality constituted in the Ego-pole himself by virtue of his position-taking.", tying the object’s abiding being-for-me to egoic habituality.
• He characterizes my basic world-relation: "As ego, I have a surrounding world, which is continually “existing for me”; and, in it, objects as “existing for me” — already with the abiding distinction between those with which I am acquainted and those only anticipated as objects with which I may become acquainted.", distinguishing actually acquired from merely anticipated objects.
• He explains ‘original acquisition’: "The former, the ones that are, in the first sense, existent for me, are such by original acquisition — that is: by my original taking cognizance of what I had never beheld previously, and my explication of it in particular intuitions of its features.", showing that constitution of objects-for-me occurs through first-time cognizing and intuitive explication.
• He describes the constitutive act’s result in formal-objective terms: "Thereby, in my synthetic activity, the object becomes constituted originally, perceptively, in the explicit sense-form: “something identical having its manifold properties”, or “object as identical with itself and undergoing determination in respect of its manifold properties”.", indicating the object is constituted as an identity through a manifold of determinations.
• He states that this position-taking and explication establishes a lasting egoic habit: "This, my activity of positing and explicating being, sets up a habituality of my Ego, by virtue of which the object, as having its manifold determinations, is mine abidingly.", so the object’s abiding being-for-me is grounded in a sedimented acquisition.
• He then generalizes to the structure of my world: "Such abiding acquisitions make up my surrounding world, so far as I am acquainted with it at the time, with its horizons of objects with which I am unacquainted — that is: objects yet to be acquired but already anticipated with this formal object-structure.", so the known world is a nexus of such acquisitions, bordered by horizons of not-yet-known but formally prefigured objects.

Source Quotes

(The ego, taken in full concreteness, we propose to call by the Leibnizian name: monad.) The Ego can be concrete only in the flowing multiformity of his intentional life, along with the objects meant — and in some cases constituted as existent for him — in that life. Manifestly, in the case of an object so constituted, its abiding existence and being-thus are a correlate of the habituality constituted in the Ego-pole himself by virtue of his position-taking. That is to be understood in the following manner.

That is to be understood in the following manner. As ego, I have a surrounding world, which is continually “existing for me”; and, in it, objects as “existing for me” — already with the abiding distinction between those with which I am acquainted and those only anticipated as objects with which I may become acquainted. The former, the ones that are, in the first sense, existent for me, are such by original acquisition — that is: by my original taking cognizance of what I had never beheld previously, and my explication of it in particular intuitions of its features.

As ego, I have a surrounding world, which is continually “existing for me”; and, in it, objects as “existing for me” — already with the abiding distinction between those with which I am acquainted and those only anticipated as objects with which I may become acquainted. The former, the ones that are, in the first sense, existent for me, are such by original acquisition — that is: by my original taking cognizance of what I had never beheld previously, and my explication of it in particular intuitions of its features. Thereby, in my synthetic activity, the object becomes constituted originally, perceptively, in the explicit sense-form: “something identical having its manifold properties”, or “object as identical with itself and undergoing determination in respect of its manifold properties”.

The former, the ones that are, in the first sense, existent for me, are such by original acquisition — that is: by my original taking cognizance of what I had never beheld previously, and my explication of it in particular intuitions of its features. Thereby, in my synthetic activity, the object becomes constituted originally, perceptively, in the explicit sense-form: “something identical having its manifold properties”, or “object as identical with itself and undergoing determination in respect of its manifold properties”. This, my activity of positing and explicating being, sets up a habituality of my Ego, by virtue of which the object, as having its manifold determinations, is mine abidingly.

Thereby, in my synthetic activity, the object becomes constituted originally, perceptively, in the explicit sense-form: “something identical having its manifold properties”, or “object as identical with itself and undergoing determination in respect of its manifold properties”. This, my activity of positing and explicating being, sets up a habituality of my Ego, by virtue of which the object, as having its manifold determinations, is mine abidingly. Such abiding acquisitions make up my surrounding world, so far as I am acquainted with it at the time, with its horizons of objects with which I am unacquainted — that is: objects yet to be acquired but already anticipated with this formal object-structure.

This, my activity of positing and explicating being, sets up a habituality of my Ego, by virtue of which the object, as having its manifold determinations, is mine abidingly. Such abiding acquisitions make up my surrounding world, so far as I am acquainted with it at the time, with its horizons of objects with which I am unacquainted — that is: objects yet to be acquired but already anticipated with this formal object-structure. I exist for myself and am continually given to myself1 by experiential evidence, as “I myself”.

Key Concepts

• Manifestly, in the case of an object so constituted, its abiding existence and being-thus are a correlate of the habituality constituted in the Ego-pole himself by virtue of his position-taking.
• As ego, I have a surrounding world, which is continually “existing for me”; and, in it, objects as “existing for me” — already with the abiding distinction between those with which I am acquainted and those only anticipated as objects with which I may become acquainted.
• The former, the ones that are, in the first sense, existent for me, are such by original acquisition — that is: by my original taking cognizance of what I had never beheld previously, and my explication of it in particular intuitions of its features.
• Thereby, in my synthetic activity, the object becomes constituted originally, perceptively, in the explicit sense-form: “something identical having its manifold properties”, or “object as identical with itself and undergoing determination in respect of its manifold properties”.
• This, my activity of positing and explicating being, sets up a habituality of my Ego, by virtue of which the object, as having its manifold determinations, is mine abidingly.
• Such abiding acquisitions make up my surrounding world, so far as I am acquainted with it at the time, with its horizons of objects with which I am unacquainted — that is: objects yet to be acquired but already anticipated with this formal object-structure.

Context

Middle of §33, where Husserl links object-constitution, egoic habitualities, and the structure of the ‘surrounding world’ by showing how original acquisitions through perceptive explication yield abiding objects-for-me and horizonally anticipated further objects.