Pirates and Parrots. On the Pragmatics of Reading

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 N/A PHILOSOPHY
Chiel Martien van den Akker
{"title":"Pirates and Parrots. On the Pragmatics of Reading","authors":"Chiel Martien van den Akker","doi":"10.1163/18758185-bja10077","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"At times we are told that our habitual way of thinking has become obsolete given the new challenge we are facing. Some of the conceptual resources at our disposal are no longer capable of addressing the challenge at hand. Therefore, they lose their appeal and are rejected. But only in contrast to these intellectual resources does the challenge appear as a challenge. So it seems that we are confronted with a paradox: we need the intellectual resources for their uselessness. For a proper understanding of this paradox and to unravel it, I will distinguish between <jats:italic>de dicto</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>de re</jats:italic> readings of philosophical texts. This distinction is borrowed from the neo-pragmatist Robert Brandom. A de dicto reading of a text is concerned with what its author <jats:italic>says</jats:italic>. A de re reading of a text is concerned with what its author <jats:italic>talks about</jats:italic>. Unpacking this distinction allows us to evaluate the <jats:italic>method</jats:italic> of engaging with our stock of conceptual resources as part of scholarly argument.","PeriodicalId":42794,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary Pragmatism","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary Pragmatism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18758185-bja10077","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

At times we are told that our habitual way of thinking has become obsolete given the new challenge we are facing. Some of the conceptual resources at our disposal are no longer capable of addressing the challenge at hand. Therefore, they lose their appeal and are rejected. But only in contrast to these intellectual resources does the challenge appear as a challenge. So it seems that we are confronted with a paradox: we need the intellectual resources for their uselessness. For a proper understanding of this paradox and to unravel it, I will distinguish between de dicto and de re readings of philosophical texts. This distinction is borrowed from the neo-pragmatist Robert Brandom. A de dicto reading of a text is concerned with what its author says. A de re reading of a text is concerned with what its author talks about. Unpacking this distinction allows us to evaluate the method of engaging with our stock of conceptual resources as part of scholarly argument.
海盗和鹦鹉。阅读的语用学研究
有时我们被告知,我们习惯的思维方式已经过时了,因为我们面临着新的挑战。我们所掌握的一些概念资源已不再能够应付眼前的挑战。因此,他们失去了上诉并被驳回。但只有在与这些智力资源形成对比的情况下,挑战才显得像挑战。因此,我们似乎面临着一个悖论:我们需要智力资源,因为它们毫无用处。为了正确理解这一悖论并解开它,我将区分对哲学文本的“自读”和“自读”。这种区分是从新实用主义者罗伯特·布兰登那里借来的。听写式阅读关注的是作者所说的话。对一篇文章的重新阅读与作者谈论的内容有关。解开这一区别使我们能够评估将我们的概念性资源库存作为学术论证的一部分的方法。
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信