Gaps: When Not Even Nothing Is There

IF 0.4
Charles Blattberg
{"title":"Gaps: When Not Even Nothing Is There","authors":"Charles Blattberg","doi":"10.31979/2151-6014(2021).120106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A paradox, it is claimed, is a radical form of contradiction, one that produces gaps in meaning. In order to approach this idea, two senses of “separation” are distinguished: separation by something and separation by nothing. The latter does not refer to nothing in an ordinary sense, however, since in that sense what’s intended is actually less than nothing. Numerous ordinary nothings in philosophy as well as in other fields are surveyed so as to clarify the contrast. Then follows the suggestion that philosophies which one would expect to have room for paradoxes actually tend either to exclude them altogether or to dull them. There is a clear alternative, however, one that fully recognizes paradoxes and yet also strives to overcome them.","PeriodicalId":338148,"journal":{"name":"Comparative Philosophy: An International Journal of Constructive Engagement of Distinct Approaches toward World Philosophy","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Comparative Philosophy: An International Journal of Constructive Engagement of Distinct Approaches toward World Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31979/2151-6014(2021).120106","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A paradox, it is claimed, is a radical form of contradiction, one that produces gaps in meaning. In order to approach this idea, two senses of “separation” are distinguished: separation by something and separation by nothing. The latter does not refer to nothing in an ordinary sense, however, since in that sense what’s intended is actually less than nothing. Numerous ordinary nothings in philosophy as well as in other fields are surveyed so as to clarify the contrast. Then follows the suggestion that philosophies which one would expect to have room for paradoxes actually tend either to exclude them altogether or to dull them. There is a clear alternative, however, one that fully recognizes paradoxes and yet also strives to overcome them.
空白:甚至不是什么都没有
它声称,悖论是矛盾的一种激进形式,它会产生意义上的差距。为了接近这个概念,区分了“分离”的两种意义:有物分离和无物分离。然而,后者并不是指普通意义上的“无”,因为在这种意义上,所要表达的实际上比“无”更少。为了澄清这种对比,我们考察了哲学和其他领域中许多平常的“无”。接下来的建议是,人们期望有悖论空间的哲学实际上倾向于完全排除它们或使它们变得沉闷。然而,有一个明确的替代方案,一个充分认识到悖论,但也努力克服它们的方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书