In section 4 she explains Husserl’s distinction between...

In section 4 she explains Husserl’s distinction between three elements of cognition - noesis (the cognitive act), noema (the cognized as cognized) and the object itself (towards which the cognitive act is directed), and outlines the debate that there has been over how these are related. She then highlights what she sees as the key issue here, which concerns the relationship between the objects of the natural attitude and the objects (noemata) of the philosophical attitude.

Must the latter not be the same as the former if phenomenological analysis is to be correct, but if this is so, then what does analysis achieve? What we have here, of course, is yet a further version of the paradox of analysis. Haaparanta does not confront this paradox directly, but instead elucidates the…