|Abstract: non-representational - abstract concept, expression of something non-objective - how to demarcate from concrete objects? How to differentiate between abstract entities and concepts, ultimately words._____________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. |
Abstractness/Foucault: In its simple being as an idea or as a picture or as another associated or substituted perception, the characteristic element is not a sign.
It is only on the condition that it manifests, among other things, the relationship that connects it with what it designates. The representation must be represented in it. (> Logic of Port Royal)
No secret return to the ternary system, split duplicated representation.
The representation is always perpendicular to itself: at the same time indication and appearance, relation to the object and manifestation of itself.
The abstract idea means the concrete perception from which it has been formed. (Condillac).
The general idea is only a special idea, which serves the other signs as signs (Berkeley).
The representations are signs of the perceptions from which they have emerged. (Hume, Condillac)_____________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.
Les mots et les choses: Une archéologie des sciences humaines , Paris 1966 - The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences, New York 1970
Die Ordnung der Dinge. Eine Archäologie der Humanwissenschaften Frankfurt/M. 1994
l’Archéologie du savoir, Paris 1969
Archäologie des Wissens Frankfurt/M. 1981