On the notion of dialectics in the linguistic bodies theory

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY Filosofia Unisinos Pub Date : 2021-03-15 DOI:10.4013/FSU.2021.221.13
Nara M. Figueiredo
{"title":"On the notion of dialectics in the linguistic bodies theory","authors":"Nara M. Figueiredo","doi":"10.4013/FSU.2021.221.13","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ness and concreteness. Concreteness is traditionally considered in the twentieth century philosophy as a feature of a material object in contrast to abstractness. This distinction marks a line in the metaphysical debate about entities. There is no consensual account of what they are, but there are clear paradigmatic cases that enable the distinction: “(...) [I]t is universally acknowledged that numbers and the other objects of pure mathematics are abstract (if they exist), whereas rocks and trees and human beings are concrete” (Rosen, 2020, para. 1). According to the authors of linguistic enact ivism, the philosophical tradition maintains that “(...) the concrete is that which is closer to actual perceptions, to the fact icity of the real world, while the abstract is that which is more general, that which, removed from the senses, indicates commonalities across actual instantiations” (LB, p. 111). Indeed, it is acknowledged that the distinction between the mental and material realms have been a crucial factor in the development of distinction between abstract and concrete since Descartes","PeriodicalId":41989,"journal":{"name":"Filosofia Unisinos","volume":"22 1","pages":"108-116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Filosofia Unisinos","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4013/FSU.2021.221.13","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ness and concreteness. Concreteness is traditionally considered in the twentieth century philosophy as a feature of a material object in contrast to abstractness. This distinction marks a line in the metaphysical debate about entities. There is no consensual account of what they are, but there are clear paradigmatic cases that enable the distinction: “(...) [I]t is universally acknowledged that numbers and the other objects of pure mathematics are abstract (if they exist), whereas rocks and trees and human beings are concrete” (Rosen, 2020, para. 1). According to the authors of linguistic enact ivism, the philosophical tradition maintains that “(...) the concrete is that which is closer to actual perceptions, to the fact icity of the real world, while the abstract is that which is more general, that which, removed from the senses, indicates commonalities across actual instantiations” (LB, p. 111). Indeed, it is acknowledged that the distinction between the mental and material realms have been a crucial factor in the development of distinction between abstract and concrete since Descartes
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
论语言体理论中的辩证法概念
具体性。在20世纪的哲学中,具体性传统上被认为是与抽象性相反的物质对象的特征。这种区别标志着关于实体的形而上学辩论中的一条线。关于它们是什么,目前还没有达成一致的解释,但有明确的范例案例可以进行区分:“(……)人们普遍认为,数字和纯数学的其他对象是抽象的(如果存在的话),而岩石、树木和人类是具体的”(Rosen,2020,第1段)。根据语言学制定主义的作者,哲学传统认为“(…)具体的是更接近实际感知的,更接近现实世界的事实性的,而抽象的是更一般的,从感官中去除的,表明实际实例化之间的共性”(LB,p.111)。事实上,人们承认,自笛卡尔以来,精神领域和物质领域之间的区别一直是抽象领域和具体领域之间区别发展的关键因素
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
Filosofia Unisinos
Filosofia Unisinos PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊最新文献
O republicanismo neorromano na concepção de liberdade de J. S. Mill Preceitos e consequências da unificação de lógica e metafísica por Hegel: A desobediência civil como um direito de defesa em Rawls e uma tentativa de resposta à crítica de Raz Verdade e Justiça em Emmanuel Levinas Uma avaliação crítica da implausibilidade teórica do socioconstrutivismo
×
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