Identity: Duality or Tripartism?

Noel E. Boulting
{"title":"Identity: Duality or Tripartism?","authors":"Noel E. Boulting","doi":"10.5406/21543682.51.2.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article explores the relationship between three elements—personality, character, and script—to interpret the idea of someone's identity. A common way to deal with this relationship is in terms of a duality, but a tripartite analysis works better. The article relies heavily on the thought of Charles Hartshorne, with the aid of Simone Weil and Charles Sanders Peirce.","PeriodicalId":315123,"journal":{"name":"Process Studies","volume":"111 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Process Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5406/21543682.51.2.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article explores the relationship between three elements—personality, character, and script—to interpret the idea of someone's identity. A common way to deal with this relationship is in terms of a duality, but a tripartite analysis works better. The article relies heavily on the thought of Charles Hartshorne, with the aid of Simone Weil and Charles Sanders Peirce.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
身份认同:二元性还是三方性?
本文探讨了人格、性格和剧本这三个要素之间的关系,以解释某人的身份。处理这种关系的常见方法是二元分析,但三方分析效果更好。这篇文章在很大程度上依赖于查尔斯·哈茨霍恩的思想,在西蒙娜·韦尔和查尔斯·桑德斯·皮尔斯的帮助下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Whitehead's Ethics: Fill in the Blanks From a Philosophy of Evolution to a Philosophy of Organism Standing Firm in the Flux: On Whitehead's Eternal Objects Starting With Whitehead: Raising Children to Thrive in Treacherous Times The Open Future: Why Future Contingents Are All False
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1