Dictionary of Arguments


Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]

Screenshot Tabelle Begriffes

 

Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.

Enhanced Search:
Search term 1: Author or Term Search term 2: Author or Term


together with


The author or concept searched is found in the following 5 entries.
Disputed term/author/ism Author
Entry
Reference
Dimensions Gärdenfors I 35
Dimension/Domains/Gärdenfors: even feelings can be ordered according to dimensions: see Osgood, Suci & Tannenbaum, 1957,(1) Russell, 1980.(2) GärdenforsVsLangacker. LangackerVsGärdenfors: (Langacker 1987, p. 151).(3)
(1) Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

(2) Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1161–1178.

(3) Langacker, R. W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar (Vol. 1). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Gä I
P. Gärdenfors
The Geometry of Meaning Cambridge 2014

Language Evolution Gärdenfors I 71
Language Evolution/Evolution/Language/Gärdenfors: Thesis: in early forms of communication the communicative act itself was more important than its expressive form. (See H. Clark, 1992, Winter, 1998, Gärdenfors, 2010). Therefore, the pragmatics of natural language is evolutionary seen the fundamental. Later, when the communication acts become more diverse and independent of the immediate context, the semantics is brought to the fore. Syntax is needed when the communication becomes even more conventional later: markers are used to establish uniqueness. Then syntax is used only for the most subtle aspects of communication. VsGärdenfors: this is in contrast to most contemporary authors in linguistics.
ChomskyVsGärdenfors: for Chomsky's school syntax is at the beginning of the investigation, semantic features are added only when grammar is not enough.
GärdenforsVsChomsky.
---
I 72
Pragmatics/GärdenforsVsChomsky/Gärdenfors: For Chomsky, the pragmatics is only the waste basket for the remains: context, deixis, etc.). Gärdenfors: for a theory of the evolution of language, we must proceed differently: pragmatics before semantics before syntax. ---
I 73
Language formation/Gärdenfors: just as the money was later added to the exchange economy and made it more efficient, the language was added to the existing communication among humans. Analogy/linguistic communication/monetary economy/Gärdenfors: one can extend the analogy: just as the money allows a stable price system, a relatively stable system of meanings is formed by language.
Game theoretical explanation/analogy: just as prices, linguistic meanings are also equilibrium points in a system. (> Meeting of minds).
---
I 78
Langauge Formation/Communication/Gärdenfors: Thesis: growing semantic complexity is achieved by extending the domains in the shared conceptual space. One can understand the linking of different domains as the creation of product spaces. ((s) Product space: Cartesian coordinate system, where one axis corresponds to a conceptual dimension.) This is how domains are combined.

Gä I
P. Gärdenfors
The Geometry of Meaning Cambridge 2014

Meaning Change Gärdenfors I 72
Meaning change/language/language development/historical/Gärdenfors: historical language development is difficult to explain: changes of meaning often occur fast and cannot be predicted. Still, we are trying to establish laws for meaning change, according to which some changes are more probable than others. If my thesis is true that pragmatics is to be put evolutionary before the semantics, certain cognitive functions have been defined before the formation of the language and are a condition for this. Language is then used to represent foreign beliefs and future goals. (See Gärdenfors 2003, 2004c; Gärdenfors et al. 2012). (1) (2) (3)

Thinking without language/DennettVsGärdenfors: in contrast, some authors argue that thinking is not possible without language: (Dennett, 1991). (4)
Terms/Dennett: Thesis: many terms can only be formed when language is already present to some extent, such as B inflation, month, heritage.
Terms/Gärdenfors: this is certainly true, but it does not deny that most of our terms have been developed by observation and action before they found their linguistic expression.

(1) Gärdenfors, P. (2003). How Homo became Sapiens: On the evolution of thinking. Oxford.

(2) Gärdenfors, P. (2004c). Cooperation and the evolution of symbolic communication. In K. Oller & U. Griebel (Eds.) The evolution of communication systems (pp. 237-256).

(3) Gärdenfors et al. (2012). Gärdenfors, P. Brinck, L. & Osvath, M. (2012) Coevolution of cooperation, cognition and communication. In F. Stjernfelt, T. Deacon & T. Schilhab (Eds.) New perspectives of the symbolic species (pp. 193-222) Berlin.

(4) Dennett, D. (1991). Consciousness explained. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.

Gä I
P. Gärdenfors
The Geometry of Meaning Cambridge 2014

Space Gärdenfors Gärdenfors I 145
Space/Language/Lakoff/Gärdenfors: (Lakoff 1987, p. 283): Thesis: in cognitive linguistics, the spatial structure of the image (image schema) can be used to explain the meaning of linguistic expressions. Spatialization of form/Lakoff: we need spatial image schemas plus metaphorical images. For example, the use of many spatial prepositions is understood as metaphorical when transferred to other areas. ((s) StrawsonVsGärdenfors/StrawsonVsLakoff: Vs Spatialization of terms/FregeVsGärdenfors/FregeVsLakoff: Vs Spatialization of terms).

Gä I
P. Gärdenfors
The Geometry of Meaning Cambridge 2014

Thinking Gärdenfors I 72
Thinking without language/DennettVsGärdenfors: in contrast, some authors argue that thinking is not possible without language: (Dennett, 1991). Concepts/Dennett: Thesis: many concepts can only be formed when language is already present, such as B inflation, month, heritage.
Concepts/Gärdenfors: this is certainly true, but it does not deny that most of our concepts have been developed by observation and action before they found their linguistic expression. GärdenforsVsDennett.
---
I 259
Deduction/Shirky/Gärdenfors: (Shirky, 2003): deductive reason is over-estimated by people who work on artificial intelligence and especially on the Semantic Web. GärdenforsVsDescartes: this over-estimation comes from Arthur Conan Doyle whose Sherlock Holmes stories have done more harm to the idea of how the human mind works than anything since Descartes.

Gä I
P. Gärdenfors
The Geometry of Meaning Cambridge 2014