Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

 
Connotation: a description of an object is connotative, which not only picks out the object, but also refers to one or more of its properties, and thus intends to produce an idea. The counter term is denotation. See also intension, way of givenness, bare particulars, properties, characteristics.

_____________
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.

 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

 
Books on Amazon
Wolf I 51
Distinguishing connotation/denotation (co-denoting/non-co-denoting).

Definition co-denotating/connotative/Mill: co-denotating/connotative are expressions that denotate a subject and include an attribute in itself.
Single Subject: e.g. London, John, England. (Denotation).
Singel attribute: e.g. White, length, virtue. (Denotation).
Co-denotating/connotation: e.g. white, long, virtuous. The word "white" denotes all white things such as snow, paper, etc., and in itself includes the attribute whiteness.
All concrete general names are connotative (co-denotating): e.g. human denotes Peter, Marie, John, etc. as the name of a class.
It is applied to them because they possess certain attributes and to express that they possess them, e.g. physicality, a certain form, etc.
The word human therefore means all these attributes and all the subjects they possess.
The name means the subjects directly, the attributes indirectly.
---
Wolf I 53
Even abstract names, although they are only the names of attributes, can be viewed as co-denotating in some cases: because attributes can also be attached to the attributes themselves.
E.g. "error" of slowness in a horse: not the actual movement in place is the error, but the slow way of movement.
---
I 53
Names/Mill: names are not co-denotating, not connotative: they denote the individuals without any attributes.
---
Wolf I 54
E.g. originally, Dartmouth may be located at the mouth of the Dart, but John is not named like this because it formed a part of the meaning that the father might have had the same name.
In addition, the mouth of the river may have shifted without changing the name of the city.
Proper names adhere to the things themselves (labels) and do not fall away when attributes of the object fall away.
Although only God may have the appropriate attributes, it is still a general name and does not belong here anyway.
---
Wolf I 55
Co-denotating names/Mill: are identifications: e.g. "the only son of Johann Müller". Also identifies attributes.
---
Wolf I 56
So whenever names have any meaning, the meaning is, in what they co-denotate and not in what they denote (the bearer).
Non-denotating (normal) names have no meaning.


_____________
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.

Mill II
J. St. Mill
Utilitarianism: 1st (First) Edition Oxford 1998

K II siehe Wol I
U. Wolf (Hg)
Eigennamen Frankfurt 1993


> Counter arguments against Mill

Authors A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z  


Concepts A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z  



> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-09-20