Meaning and Language: Phenomenological Perspectives pp 49-73

Part of the Phaenomenologica book series (PHAE, volume 187)

Husserl’s Critique of Double Judgments

  • Carlo Ierna

In this paper I will discuss Edmund Husserl’s critique of Franz Brentano’s interpretation of categorical judgments as Double Judgments (Doppelurteile). This will be developed mostly as an internal critique, within the framework of the school of Brentano, and not through a direct contrast with Husserl’s own theory of judgment, as presented e.g. in the Fifth Investigation. Already during the 1890s Husserl overcame the psychologistic aspects of Brentano’s approach, advocating the importance of analysing the logical structure underlying language independently from psychology. Moreover, Husserl’s critique seems to be also applicable to Bertrand Russell’s analysis, which shares an important aspect of Brentano’s theory. I will try to avoid going too deep into the various theories of judgment and keep mostly to the issue of double judgments.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Franz Brentano, Psychologie vom empirischen Standpunkt (Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1874).Google Scholar
  2. Franz Brentano, Die elementare Logik und die in ihr nötigen Reformen I Ms. Y 2, (Vienna, WS 1884/85).Google Scholar
  3. Franz Brentano, Vom Ursprung sittlicher Erkenntnis (Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1889).Google Scholar
  4. Franz Brentano, The Origin of the Knowledge of Right and Wrong, trans. by Cecil Hague (Westminster: Archibald Constable & Co Ltd, 1902). Franz Brentano, Psychology from an Empirical Standpoint, edited by Linda L. McAlister (London: Routledge, 1995).Google Scholar
  5. Arkadiusz Chrudzimski, “Die Intentionalitätstheorie Anton Martys”, in Grazer Philosophische Studien 62 (2001), pp. 175-214.Google Scholar
  6. Arkadiusz Chrudzimski, Intentionalitätstheorie beim frühen Brentano, Phae-nomenologica 159 (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2001).Google Scholar
  7. Arkadiusz Chrudzimski, Gegenstandstheorie und Theorie der Intentionalität bei Alexius Meinong, Phaenomenologica 181 (Dordrecht / Boston / London: Springer, 2007).Google Scholar
  8. Franz Hillebrand, Die neuen Theorien der Kategorischen Schlüsse (Wien: Alfred Hölder, 1891).Google Scholar
  9. Alois Höfler & Alexius Meinong, Philosophische Propädeutik. Erster Theil: Logik (Vienna: F. Tempsky / G. Freytag, 1890).Google Scholar
  10. Edmund Husserl, Philosophie der Arithmetik (Psychologische und Logische Un-tersuchungen) (Halle-Saale: C.E.M. Pfeffer (Robert Stricker), 1891).Google Scholar
  11. Edmund Husserl Philosophie der Arithmetik, edited by Lothar Eley, Husser-liana XII (Den Haag: Nijhoff, 1970).Google Scholar
  12. Edmund Husserl, Logische Untersuchungen (Erster Band: Prolegomena zur reinen Logik), edited by Elmar Holenstein, Husserliana XVIII (Den Haag: Nijhoff, 1975).Google Scholar
  13. Edmund Husserl, Aufsätze und Rezensionen (1890-1910), edited by Bern-hard Rang, Husserliana XXII (Den Haag/Boston/London: Nijhoff, 1979).Google Scholar
  14. Edmund Husserl, Logik Vorlesung 1896, edited by Elisabeth Schuhmann, Husserliana Materialienbände I (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2001).Google Scholar
  15. Edmund Husserl, Logische Untersuchungen (Ergänzungsband: Erster Teil), edited by Ullrich Melle, Husserliana XX/1 (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2002)Google Scholar
  16. Carlo Ierna, “The Beginnings of Husserl’s Philosophy. Part 1: From Über den Begriff der Zahl to Philosophie der Arithmetik”, in The New Yearbook for Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy V (2005), pp. 1-56.Google Scholar
  17. Carlo Ierna, “The Beginnings of Husserl’s Philosophy. Part 2: Mathe-matical and Philosophical Background”, in The New Yearbook for Phenomenology and Phenomenological Philosophy VI (2006), pp. 33-81.Google Scholar
  18. Carlo Ierna “Relations in the early Works of Meinong and Husserl” in Alfred Schramm, editor, Meinong Studies - Meinong Studien, volume III. Ontos Verlag, 2008 (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  19. Dale Jacquette, editor, The Cambridge Companion to Brentano (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).Google Scholar
  20. David F. Lindenfeld, The Transformation of Positivism: Alexius Meinong and European Thought, 1880-1920 (Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press, 1980).Google Scholar
  21. Anton Marty, “Über subjectlose Sätze und das Verhältnis der Grammatik zur Logik und Psychologie (Sechster Artikel)”, in Vierteljahrsschrift für wissenschaftliche Philosophie 19 (1895).Google Scholar
  22. Roberto Poli, “Twardowski’s Theory of Modification against the Back-ground of Traditional Logic”, in Axiomathes 1 (1993), pp. 41-57.Google Scholar
  23. Robin D. Rollinger, Husserl’s Position in the School of Brentano, Phaenome-nologica 150 (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1999).Google Scholar
  24. Robin D. Rollinger, “Husserl’s Elementary Logic”, in Studia Phaenomeno-logica III:1-2 (2003)Google Scholar
  25. Robin D. Rollinger, “Austrian Theories of Judgment: Bolzano, Brentano, Meinong, and Husserl”, in Wolfgang Huemer and Arkadiusz Chrudz-imski, editors, Phenomenology and Analysis: Essays in Central Euro-pean Philosophy (Frankfurt a. M.: Ontos-Verlag, 2004a), pp. 257-284.Google Scholar
  26. Robin D. Rollinger, “Brentano and Husserl” in Jacquette (2004), pp. 255-276Google Scholar
  27. Robin D. Rollinger, “Meinong and Brentano”, in Alfred Schramm, editor, Meinong Studies - Meinong Studien, volume I (Ontos Verlag, 2005), pp. 159-197.Google Scholar
  28. Bertrand Russell, “On Denoting” in Mind 14 (1905), pp. 479-493.Google Scholar
  29. Elisabeth Schuhmann and Karl Schuhmann, “Husserls Manuskripte zu seinem Göttinger Doppelvortrag von 1901” in Husserl Studies 17:2 (2001), pp. 87-123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Karl Schuhmann, “Husserl’s Abhandlung ‘Intentionale Gegenstände’. Edi-tion der ursprünglichen Druckfassung”, in Brentano Studien 3 (1992), pp. 137-176.Google Scholar
  31. Karl Schuhmann, “Stumpf, C. (1848 - 1936)”, in Liliana Albertazzi, Mas-simo Libardi and Roberto Poli, editors, The School of Franz Brentano (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1996), pp. 109-129.Google Scholar
  32. Karl Schuhmann “Intentionalität und Intentionaler Gegenstand” in Cees Leijenhorst and Piet Steenbakkers, editors, Karl Schuhmann: Selected Papers on Phenomenology (Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2004).Google Scholar
  33. Peter Simons, “Judging correctly: Brentano and the reform of elementary logic”, in Jacquette (2004).Google Scholar
  34. Peter M. Simons, “Brentano’s Reform of Logic” in Topoi 6 (1987), pp. 25-38.Google Scholar
  35. Janet Farrell Smith, “The Russell-Meinong Debate” in Philosophy and Phenomenological Research XLV:3 (1985), pp. 305-350.Google Scholar
  36. Peter F. Strawson, “On Referring”, in Mind, Vol. 59, No. 235, (Jul., 1950), pp. 320-344.Google Scholar
  37. Carl Stumpf, Logik und Enzyklopädie der Philosophie Ms. Q 14, (Halle, SS 1887).Google Scholar
  38. Carl Stumpf, Logik (Diktate) Ms. Q 13, (Halle, SS 1888).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlo Ierna
    • 1
  1. 1.Husserl-Archives LeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations