MELBOURNE INTERNATIONAL PHILOSOPHY, SERIES VOLUME 4 ON THE CONTENT AND OBJECT OF PRESENTATIONS »y ramet by Bier: yas 7. 1 sREEDNECHT Assistant editor LERKE M. BRODORTON Edita dito) Coun: RM, Chisholm, Brow Uaivemicy, Rhode Island, Mate Fubar, Ghishorg University. D. A. J. Gating, University of 3eloorae ILL A! tar, Univeniiy College, Onions, ©. Morass, Uaivaty of Pista and Vale Univesity. otarbnsh, Warsaw. H. J. MeCloss Ex Irste Univesity, Buadoors, Meloouroe. J. Pasemore, Austalion Natioml Universi¢y, Cantera C. Psrelaan, ‘Free University of Braseb, 4. Quustoo, Now Gallege Qxiord. Nathan Rotoustich, The Fietrew Univesity of Jerlem: Franco Spsaai Centeo. Supesiore Gi Logics © Scrace Camparate, Bologna W. Ttarkiwiee, Warsow Je Glee, Want Unteemty, New Zanland Communications toe addreaed to the Kaito, eo Pilsopby Department, Univesity of Meurue, Pukvile, 5052, Victoria, Aurea ON THE CONTENT AND OBJECT OF PRESENTATIONS A PSYCHOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION translated and with an introduction by R.GROSSMANN MARTINUS NIJHOFF - THE HAGUE ~ 1977(© 2077 by Martinus Dijhoff, The Hague, Nethrtots Ail nights ase, tncluding th right trond 2 1 sopra hs ok o Bate therea)imay form sun go 247 36367 TABLE OF CONTENTS Triroduction B 16 35 ‘Act, CONTENT, AND Oujxer OF THE PRESENTATION ‘Act, Conant, ax Opjger oF Tuas JupoMEsT Naoees ano Presentations SO-CALLED "OujECLESS" PRESENTATIONS ‘Tae DINPERENCE ExTweEN CONTENT AND OsyscT DESCRIPTION OF THE OsyECT OF A PRESENTATION ‘Tas Aupicorry or Tas Tenat ‘Ciaracrenisric! ‘Tus Marenat, Consrrruswts OF Tus O8yEcT ‘Tw Foswat Constituents oF tus Opject . Tax CONSTITUENTS OF THE CONTENT ‘Twe RELATIONSHIP BETWHEN THE Osyect AND THE CONTENT or 4 Paesswrarioy ‘Tae Cmaracresastic Iypimscr PRESENTATIONS. ‘Tas Oojners oF GENERAL PRESENTATIONSINTRODUCTION ‘Twardowski's little book - of which I here offer a translation ~is one of, ‘the most remazkable works in the history of modem philosophy. It is concise, char, and ~ in Findiay’s words ~ “amazingly rish in ideas." Tt is therefore a paradigm of whet some contemporary philosophers approvingly cal “analytic philosophy.” But Twardowsla's bool is also ‘of considerable historical significance, His views reflect Brentano's ear~ lier position and thus shed some light on this stage of Brentano's philo- sophy. Furthermore, they form a link between this stage, on the one hhaad, and those two grandiose attempts to propagate ratiopalism in ‘an age of science, on the other hand, which are known as Meinong’s ‘theory of entities and Husser’s phenomenology. Twardowski's views ‘thus point to the future and introduce many of the problems which, through the influence of Meinong, Husser!, Rossell, and Moore, have ‘become standard faze in contemporary philosophy. In this introduc tion, I shall call attention to the close counection between some of ‘Twardowsiy’s mamn ideas and the corresponding thoughts ofthese four philosophers, 1. IDEAS AND THEIR INTENTIONS ‘Twardowski’s main contention is clear. He claims that we must dis- tinguish between the act, the content, and the object of a presentation. ‘The erucial German term is ‘Vorstellung.’ This term has a corresponding verb and allows for such expressions as das Vorgestellc’ From a purely Philosophical point of view, the best translation of ‘Vorstllung’ is, in ay opinion, the word ‘idea.’ But there is no corresponding verb in English, nor can we easily translate ‘das Vorgestlte’ I ave therefore followed the common practice and translated 'Vorstellung,' not by ‘idea,’ but rather by ‘presentation.’ But I have done s0 with some mis- 1 Sie J. nny, sana Thay of Obes and Vata et (Ost 292)