Linguagem e Ontologia: questões sobre conhecimento e agência=Language and Ontology: questions on knowledge and agency最新文献

筛选

英文中文

O enigma da existência: defesa da abordagem rejeicionista 存在之谜:为拒绝主义方法辩护

Linguagem e Ontologia: questões sobre conhecimento e agência=Language and Ontology: questions on knowledge and agency Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.21747/978-989-9082-05-2/ofaa6

Luís Carlos Estrela Ramos

引用次数: 0

Negotiating Value 谈判的价值

Linguagem e Ontologia: questões sobre conhecimento e agência=Language and Ontology: questions on knowledge and agency Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.21747/978-989-9082-05-2/ofaa3

Diogo Santos

{"title":"Negotiating Value","authors":"Diogo Santos","doi":"10.21747/978-989-9082-05-2/ofaa3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21747/978-989-9082-05-2/ofaa3","url":null,"abstract":"Sundell (2016) presents the grounds to undermine the claim that so called evaluative terms are semantically different from other gradable terms—i.e., that they are genuinely evaluative and/or that it is encoded in their semantics the relativization to a standard determined by an experiencer/appraiser. In order to undermine the claim, Sundell argues that the persistence of evaluative disagreements can be explained without assuming that aesthetic terms are indeed evaluative when one takes into account metalinguistic negotiations—disagreements about how one should use a word or expression. By showing that metalinguistic negotiations do all the needed work without requiring that one assumes that aesthetic adjectives are literally evaluative, Sundell’s expanded argument can be stated in the following way: for the sake of parsimony, one should treat evaluative terms as descriptive gradables. In the paper, I argue that metalinguistic negotiations cannot be the whole story by showing that, if one denies that evaluative terms are literally evaluative, metalinguistic negotiations do not account for the important connection between valuewords and social interactions about value.","PeriodicalId":115439,"journal":{"name":"Linguagem e Ontologia: questões sobre conhecimento e agência=Language and Ontology: questions on knowledge and agency","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132152071","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Uma abordagem reducionista ao problema da identidade dos indiscerníveis 一种简化主义的方法来解决不可分辨的同一性问题

Linguagem e Ontologia: questões sobre conhecimento e agência=Language and Ontology: questions on knowledge and agency Pub Date : 1900-01-01 DOI: 10.21747/978-989-9082-05-2/ofaa4

J. F. Silva

{"title":"Uma abordagem reducionista ao problema da identidade dos indiscerníveis","authors":"J. F. Silva","doi":"10.21747/978-989-9082-05-2/ofaa4","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21747/978-989-9082-05-2/ofaa4","url":null,"abstract":"I aim to defend the thesis that the truth of any proposition about the number of particulars that exist in the world is supervenient upon the truth of all propositions exclusively about universals (i.e., properties and relations). If this thesis is correct, all facts about the individuation of particulars are reducible to facts exclusively about universals, and there is no primitive individuation of particulars. I present two arguments against the possibility of this kind of primitive individuation. The first is that the possibility of primitively individuated particulars raises radical skeptical doubts about the number of particulars with which we are acquainted. The second is that primitively individuated particulars are theoretically redundant since the qualitative character of any possible world can be exhaustively described if we talk only about universals. The classical bundle theory is the most common variety of reductionism about the number of particulars, but I also want to defend that it is not the only possible variety. More specifically, I present an alternative according to which particulars are individuated by spatial relations. This alternative, in contrast to bundle theory, does not commit us to the controversial principle of the identity of indiscernibles, but it implies a transcendent conception of universals.","PeriodicalId":115439,"journal":{"name":"Linguagem e Ontologia: questões sobre conhecimento e agência=Language and Ontology: questions on knowledge and agency","volume":"61 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127920029","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0