Both Husserl and Haugeland develop an account ofconstitution to address the question of howour mental episodes can beabout physical objects and thus, through the intentionalrelation, bridge the gap betweenthe mental and the physical. The respectivetheories of the two philosophers of very differentbackground show not only how mentalepisodes can have empirical content, but also howthis content is shaped by pastexperiences or a holistic background of other mentalepisodes. In this article I first outlineand then contrast their positions in order to showhow the notion of constitution can beadopted to address major problems of contemporaryphilosophy of mind, especially thequestion of how the mind can be related to itsphysical environment.