Cantitate/Preț
Produs

Objectivity and the Language-Dependence of Thought: A Transcendental Defence of Universal Lingualism: Routledge Studies in Contemporary Philosophy

Autor Christian Barth
en Limba Engleză Paperback – 27 feb 2015
Does thought depend on language? Primarily as a consequence of the cognitive turn in empirical disciplines like psychology and ethology, many current empirical researchers and empirically minded philosophers tend to answer this question in the negative. This book rejects this mainstream view and develops a philosophical argument in favor of a universal dependence of language on thought. In doing so, it comprises insights of two primary representatives of 20th century and contemporary philosophy, namely Donald Davidson and Robert Brandom.
Barth offers an introduction to the debate concerning the language-dependence of thought and lays the methodological foundation for the subsequent argument in favor of a universal dependence of thought on language, presenting an account and defense of the transcendental method in reference to the writings of Peter F. Strawson. He then offers a transcendental argument in favor of a universal language-dependence of thought, beginning with a reevaluation of a basic idea for an argument originally presented by Donald Davidson. Later, two main objections to the conclusion of this transcendental argument are addressed and rejected using Robert Brandom’s inferentialist and normativist account of thought and language. In the course of doing so, the recent debate on Brandom’s work is addressed extensively, and main objections to Brandom’s work are presented and answered.
Citește tot Restrânge

Toate formatele și edițiile

Toate formatele și edițiile Preț Express
Paperback (1) 48540 lei  6-8 săpt.
  Taylor & Francis – 27 feb 2015 48540 lei  6-8 săpt.
Hardback (1) 106122 lei  6-8 săpt.
  Taylor & Francis – 29 iul 2010 106122 lei  6-8 săpt.

Din seria Routledge Studies in Contemporary Philosophy

Preț: 48540 lei

Nou

Puncte Express: 728

Preț estimativ în valută:
9289 9597$ 7727£

Carte tipărită la comandă

Livrare economică 19 martie-02 aprilie

Preluare comenzi: 021 569.72.76

Specificații

ISBN-13: 9781138868526
ISBN-10: 1138868523
Pagini: 258
Dimensiuni: 152 x 229 x 14 mm
Greutate: 0.36 kg
Ediția:1
Editura: Taylor & Francis
Colecția Routledge
Seria Routledge Studies in Contemporary Philosophy

Locul publicării:Oxford, United Kingdom

Public țintă

Postgraduate and Undergraduate

Cuprins

Abbreviations Preface 1: The Lingualism/Mentalism-Controversy 2: From Conceptual Analysis to Transcendental Analysis 3: The Argument in favour of Universal Conceptual Lingualism (UCL-Argument) 4: Answering the Objection from Thought and the Objection from Objectivity 5: Summary and Outlook Notes Bibliography Index

Descriere

Does thought depend on language? Primarily as a consequence of the cognitive turn in empirical disciplines like psychology and ethology, many current empirical researchers and empirically minded philosophers tend to answer this question in the negative. This book rejects this mainstream view and develops a philosophical argument in favor of a universal dependence of language on thought. In doing so, it comprises insights of two primary representatives of 20th century and contemporary philosophy, namely Donald Davidson and Robert Brandom.
Barth offers an introduction to the debate concerning the language-dependence of thought and lays the methodological foundation for the subsequent argument in favor of a universal dependence of thought on language, presenting an account and defense of the transcendental method in reference to the writings of Peter F. Strawson. He then offers a transcendental argument in favor of a universal language-dependence of thought, beginning with a reevaluation of a basic idea for an argument originally presented by Donald Davidson. Later, two main objections to the conclusion of this transcendental argument are addressed and rejected using Robert Brandom’s inferentialist and normativist account of thought and language. In the course of doing so, the recent debate on Brandom’s work is addressed extensively, and main objections to Brandom’s work are presented and answered.