Talk:The Transcendence of the Ego

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Philosophy: Literature / Continental / Contemporary Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophical literature
	Continental philosophy
	Contemporary philosophy

Untitled

This articel uses what I believe are philosophical jargon to exlain concepts. The explaination could be made simpler, for people without prior knowledge of these terms. Terms are used that are not explained, here's an example: 'It was also Sartre's view, that differed from Husserl's, that 'intentional objects' are consciousness, and that the value of intended stuffs was in consciousness of them. 'Intentional objects' are therefore both objects of consciousness and consciousness ...'

--Uroojshaikh 10:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 14:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:The Transcendence of the Ego/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

How can one think of one own thinking? I think it's not right, or wrongly explain.

Last edited at 17:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 08:27, 30 April 2016 (UTC)