| Author |
Message
|
| coberst |
 Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 2:07 am Post subject: SGCS Claims the Objectivist Claim is Fallacious |
 |
|
Forum Senior
Joined: 18 Feb 2007
Posts: 392
|
SGCS Claims the Objectivist Claim is Fallacious
SGCS (Second Generation Cognitive Science) has introduced a new paradigm for cognitive science based upon four decades of empirical research. This empirically derived paradigm rejects the a priori rationalizations of objectivist philosophy.
An expression in a language is considered to be semantically autonomous if that expression meaningfully stands alone on its independent terms. There are two variations of semantic autonomy: conceptual autonomy and nonconceptual autonomy.
Conceptual autonomy assumes that expressions in a language, i.e. words and phrases, express concepts, which are part of human cognition; thus it is concepts that contain meaning. Words and phrases are thus semantically autonomous provided the concept noted is semantically autonomous.
Nonconceptual autonomy assumes that concepts either do not exist or that concepts have nothing to do with meaning. Thus words and phrases acquire meaning by means of what they designate in the world.
Literal Meaning Theory:
The literal meaning theory is about language and not concepts. This theory argues that all literal language, i.e. conventional language, is semantically autonomous. This theory rests on objectivist philosophy, which argues that objective reality is independent of human cognition, i.e. it is ‘mind free’. Objectivist philosophy argues that “statements made in ordinary, conventional language are capable of being objectively true or false
The notion of “literal meaning†presupposes the truth of the Literal Meaning Theory… This is in accord with the common philosophical view that all concepts are reflections of objective reality, and hence cannot be metaphorical.â€
The Objectivist Claim:
“The world comes structured in a way that is objective—independent of any minds. The world as objectively structured includes objects, properties of those objects, relations holding among those objects, and categories of those objects, properties and relation.â€
The objectivist claim takes for granted that “Conventional expressions in a language designate aspects of an objective, mind-free reality. Therefore, a statement must objectively be either true or false, depending on whether the objective world accords with the statement.â€
SGCS claims that the Objectivist Claim is fallacious because it does not recognize “that truth and falsity are relative to conceptual frameworks…Thus it fails to recognize that a statement can be meaningful only relative to its defining framework, and it can be true or false only relative to the way we understand reality given that framework.â€
Do you support the objectivist claim?
Quotes from “More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor†by Lakoff and Turner |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| sunshinewarrior |
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 5:49 am Post subject: Re: SGCS Claims the Objectivist Claim is Fallacious |
|
|
Forum Ph.D.
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 974
Location: London
|
| coberst wrote: |
SGCS claims that the Objectivist Claim is fallacious because it does not recognize “that truth and falsity are relative to conceptual frameworks…Thus it fails to recognize that a statement can be meaningful only relative to its defining framework, and it can be true or false only relative to the way we understand reality given that framework.â€
Do you support the objectivist claim?
Quotes from “More Than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor†by Lakoff and Turner |
The Objectivists' claims have always run counter, and after the fact, to what Kant demonstrated a long time ago - we have no way of making ontological claims. Ever since, groups like the Objectivists have kicked against the pricks and tried somehow to demonstrate that ontology is possible, that it is possible to speak of the nature of the noumenal and so on. A respected modern philosopher like John searle also takes a similar approach, except that he, being a decent philosopher, at least takes a pragmatic view. For Objectivists it has always seemed to be a matter of an act of faith, or axiomatic, rather than any reasonably argued claim.
As such, therefore, I do not support the Objectivist claim. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| organic god |
| Posted: Wed Jun 25, 2008 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Forum Sophomore
Joined: 06 Feb 2008
Posts: 165
Location: The Pro Chair
|
toally
_________________
everything is mathematical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
