In physics, the theory of relativity introduced the position of the observer as a theme of science. Yet physics, as such, is unable to say what this “position of the observer” means. It obviously refers to what we touched on by saying: I am here at any time. In this being-here, the bodiliness of the human being always comes into play. In the area of microphysics, the act or measuring and the instrument themselves interfere with comprehending the objects during experimentation. That means that the bodiliness or the human being comes into play within the “objectivity” of natural science. Does this only hold true for scientific research, or is it true here precisely because in general the bodying forth of the human being's body co-determines the human being's being-in-the-world.[sic] If this is the case, the phenomenon of the body can be brought into view if and only when being-in-the-world is explicitly experienced, appropriated, and sustained as the basic characteristic of human existence. This can only be done by critically overcoming the hitherto dominant subject-object relation [in human knowledge]. One must see that science as such (i.e., all theoretical-scientific knowledge) is founded as a way of being-in-the-world—founded in the bodily having of a world.

Pp. 93-4

¶ 7:26 AM