Political Facts and the Production of Meanings in Discourse

IF 2.9 1区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
I. V. Kazakov
{"title":"Political Facts and the Production of Meanings in Discourse","authors":"I. V. Kazakov","doi":"10.30570/2078-5089-2023-109-2-19-36","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article proposes conceptualization of a political fact as a semiotic sign, based on Peirce’s models, which were reexamined by a number of modern researchers and filled with a discursive content. Facts are defined as statements with illocutionary power that represent a state of affairs to the mind, which interprets that representation as valid. Political facts differ from others in that the process of their interpretation is politically motivated i.e., pragmatically and normatively. Fact is also considered as a special case of a speech act: following John Searle, the author believes that such acts are always illocutionary, although there is not always a direct connection between the structure of an utterance and its intended meaning. On the basis of such understanding of facts and Peirce’s classification of interpretants, the author builds semiotic typology of facts. He distinguishes between eight types of facts depending on the position of an interpretant in relation to a sign. All types of facts are located in a three-dimensional conceptual model, which is presented in the article in three tables. The author reveals possible prerequisites that determine a subject’s choice of this or the other mode of the interpretation of facts. The author finds a connection between certain types of interpretants with behavioral choices of subjects, as well as with the concept of intersubjectivity. According to the author, such conceptualization can work as an intermediary model that connects various scientific traditions via a single apparatus that allows overcoming the differences between individual approaches through an appeal to more general characteristics of the subject. The constructed typology of facts also has practical significance, especially in the study of political discourse, where dispute about facts plays a central role. It gives a researcher an opportunity not only to focus on certain categories of facts, but also, when faced with any facts, to effectively categorize them, identifying their key characteristics.","PeriodicalId":47624,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Political Philosophy","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Political Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30570/2078-5089-2023-109-2-19-36","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article proposes conceptualization of a political fact as a semiotic sign, based on Peirce’s models, which were reexamined by a number of modern researchers and filled with a discursive content. Facts are defined as statements with illocutionary power that represent a state of affairs to the mind, which interprets that representation as valid. Political facts differ from others in that the process of their interpretation is politically motivated i.e., pragmatically and normatively. Fact is also considered as a special case of a speech act: following John Searle, the author believes that such acts are always illocutionary, although there is not always a direct connection between the structure of an utterance and its intended meaning. On the basis of such understanding of facts and Peirce’s classification of interpretants, the author builds semiotic typology of facts. He distinguishes between eight types of facts depending on the position of an interpretant in relation to a sign. All types of facts are located in a three-dimensional conceptual model, which is presented in the article in three tables. The author reveals possible prerequisites that determine a subject’s choice of this or the other mode of the interpretation of facts. The author finds a connection between certain types of interpretants with behavioral choices of subjects, as well as with the concept of intersubjectivity. According to the author, such conceptualization can work as an intermediary model that connects various scientific traditions via a single apparatus that allows overcoming the differences between individual approaches through an appeal to more general characteristics of the subject. The constructed typology of facts also has practical significance, especially in the study of political discourse, where dispute about facts plays a central role. It gives a researcher an opportunity not only to focus on certain categories of facts, but also, when faced with any facts, to effectively categorize them, identifying their key characteristics.
政治事实与话语意义的产生
本文以皮尔斯的模型为基础,提出将政治事实概念化为符号学符号,这一模型被许多现代研究者重新审视,并充满了话语内容。事实被定义为具有言外之力的陈述,它代表了一种事物的状态,它将这种陈述解释为有效的。政治事实不同于其他事实,因为它们的解释过程具有政治动机,即实用主义和规范。事实也被认为是言语行为的一个特例:按照John Searle的观点,作者认为这种行为总是言外行为,尽管话语的结构与其预期意义之间并不总是存在直接联系。在这种对事实的理解和皮尔斯对解释者的分类的基础上,作者构建了事实的符号学类型学。他区分了八种类型的事实,这取决于解释者与符号的关系。所有类型的事实都位于一个三维概念模型中,该模型在文章中以三个表的形式呈现。作者揭示了决定主体选择这种或另一种事实解释模式的可能先决条件。作者发现某些类型的解释者与主体的行为选择以及主体间性的概念之间存在联系。根据作者的说法,这种概念化可以作为一种中介模型,通过一种单一的装置将各种科学传统联系起来,通过对主题的更一般特征的呼吁来克服个人方法之间的差异。事实的建构类型学也具有现实意义,特别是在政治话语的研究中,关于事实的争论起着核心作用。它给研究人员提供了一个机会,不仅关注某些类别的事实,而且,当面对任何事实时,有效地对它们进行分类,识别它们的关键特征。
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
4.10
自引率
5.60%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: The Journal of Political Philosophy is an international journal devoted to the study of theoretical issues arising out of moral, legal and political life. It welcomes, and hopes to foster, work cutting across a variety of disciplinary concerns, among them philosophy, sociology, history, economics and political science. The journal encourages new approaches, including (but not limited to): feminism; environmentalism; critical theory, post-modernism and analytical Marxism; social and public choice theory; law and economics, critical legal studies and critical race studies; and game theoretic, socio-biological and anthropological approaches to politics. It also welcomes work in the history of political thought which builds to a larger philosophical point and work in the philosophy of the social sciences and applied ethics with broader political implications. Featuring a distinguished editorial board from major centres of thought from around the globe, the journal draws equally upon the work of non-philosophers and philosophers and provides a forum of debate between disparate factions who usually keep to their own separate journals.
×
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