Philosophy as rigorous science

I’m trying to read this article, Philosophy as Rigorous Science, by Edmond Husserl (translated by Quentin Lauer). Husserl’s goal of the article is to criticize naturalistic philosophy as self contradictory. But to me, his criticisms seem vague and full of meaningless jargon.

Has anyone else read this article? Can you clarify Huserl’s criticisms?

And how is Quine’s Naturalized Epistemology different than the naturalism that Husserl criticizes?

Post the article I’ll read it.

Thought I’d be restricted from posting links, but this is the article:

bump? No one has read this article?