as the principle for objective cognition, because the “self ” itself constitutes an incomplete apprehension of the object, whereby any use of the “self ” as an epistemological principle is meaningless as well as backward.147 The principle of knowledge thus expresses knowledge as the combination of objectivity and subjectivity, insofar as valid knowledge must have objective material content, while simultaneously giving this content a logical, inner form.The principle of knowledge forces knowledge to “reproduce” things or to analyze them as far as possible, thus expressing the objective and subjective limits for knowledge. Knowledge thus cannot strive to discern more than there is in an object, but conversely the subject cannot be criticized for failing to perform the impossible task of discerning that which is inaccessible to the subject. Hägerström’s objective cognitive principle thereby uses the examined object as the principle for objective knowledge, but mitigating the application of the principle by the actual limits of the epistemological subject,148 thus disqualifying humans from metaphysical insights, as humans, seen from a metaphysical perspective, can only discern the mundane aspects of reality.149 Till analysen af det empiriska själfmedvetandet defines a judgment in the following manner: In a judgment, self-consciousness is one of two components; the other component is the object matter to which self-consciousness is posited to have a specific, certain relationship.150 In a judgment, the context that the judgment describes is that of a causal relationship between two elements, a context whose elements are always determined as being conp a r t i i i , c h a p t e r 3 218 147 Ibid. 148 Cf. ibid., pp. 74-75. 149 See Hägerström’s epistemological triptych in Hägerström,“‘Ein Stein ...’”. See Part II, 5.1. 150 Cf. Hägerström, Till analysen, pp. 3-4. 3. 3. 3 the de f ini t ion and formulat ion of a judgment
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=