|Picture: an object which is in a specified relationship to another object. The objects may originate from different areas such as experience and imagination or from similar areas (lighting and photography) or from the same domain as in the forgery. Mathematics here the required relation is defined a function. _____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. |
Picture/Goodman: Pictures are more likely to compare with the temperature events, than with the heights of the mercury column.
Because in the systems in question, the images are like the temperatures rather denoted, they do not denote themselves.
Definition seeing/Goodman: what properties a picture exemplifies or expresses is comparable to the use of a scale-free thermometer.
Definition saying/Goodman: to say what the picture exemplifies, is then a matter of fitting the correct words from a syntactically unlimited and semantically dense language. There will always be another expression, such that we cannot determine what is actually exemplified by the picture in question. To say what a picuture exemplifies is like measuring without giving tolerance ranges.
Pictorial exemplification/Goodman: So in reality it is an inverted display or measuring system.
Systems may not be equated with language. Languages have alphabets, pictorial systems not.
Pictorial elements/Goodman: can never, how similar they may be, represent syntactic equivalents. Because without an alphabet we have no way to differentiate significant and insignificant differences for marks.
A blurry horse-representation is certainly not a representation of a blurred horse. The blurriness belongs to the presentation or imagination.
We do not have a lexicon of pictorial forms. Therefore, the theory of language cannot explain visual skills.
Photography/Goodman: A photograph of the surface of Mars reminds us that the Mediumn does not provide its own scale for size and distance.
Digital/Analog/Goodman: is the picture composed of dots no digital picture? No! Because no symbol is digital or analog.
A complete scheme is only pictural if it is analog. Verbally, if it is digital.
In other words, not each analog, full scheme is pictural and not each digital full scheme is verbal.
Picture/Goodman: So we are unable to reach a definition of images._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
Catherine Z. Elgin
Reconceptions in Philosophy and Other Arts and Sciences, Indianapolis 1988
Revisionen Frankfurt 1989
Ways of Worldmaking, Indianapolis/Cambridge 1978
Weisen der Welterzeugung Frankfurt 1984
Fact, Fiction and Forecast, New York 1982
Tatsache Fiktion Voraussage Frankfurt 1988
Languages of Art. An Approach to a Theory of Symbols, Indianapolis 1976
Sprachen der Kunst Frankfurt 1997