综合哲学实践中的模态逻辑

IF 0.2 0 PHILOSOPHY
Aleksandar Fatic
{"title":"综合哲学实践中的模态逻辑","authors":"Aleksandar Fatic","doi":"10.2298/fid2303424f","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper discusses the differences between a practical emphasis on binary logic on the one hand, and modal logic, on the other, specifically in the fields of philosophical practice and psychotherapy. Although studies of practical applications of modal logic in the helping professions are recent, the discussion largely revolves around the controversial application of modality in psychotherapy by C.G. Jung and Lacan?s psychoanalysis. The present argument touches on some of the conceptual dilemmas associated with the relationship between logical modality, intuition and scientificity in psychotherapy, all of which are a part of the philosophical foundation of psychotherapy.","PeriodicalId":41902,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy and Society-Filozofija i Drustvo","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Modal logic in integrative philosophical practice\",\"authors\":\"Aleksandar Fatic\",\"doi\":\"10.2298/fid2303424f\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper discusses the differences between a practical emphasis on binary logic on the one hand, and modal logic, on the other, specifically in the fields of philosophical practice and psychotherapy. Although studies of practical applications of modal logic in the helping professions are recent, the discussion largely revolves around the controversial application of modality in psychotherapy by C.G. Jung and Lacan?s psychoanalysis. The present argument touches on some of the conceptual dilemmas associated with the relationship between logical modality, intuition and scientificity in psychotherapy, all of which are a part of the philosophical foundation of psychotherapy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41902,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy and Society-Filozofija i Drustvo\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy and Society-Filozofija i Drustvo\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2298/fid2303424f\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy and Society-Filozofija i Drustvo","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2298/fid2303424f","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文讨论了在实践中强调二元逻辑与模态逻辑之间的区别,特别是在哲学实践和心理治疗领域。尽管对模态逻辑在帮助专业中的实际应用的研究是最近才开始的,但讨论主要围绕着荣格(C.G. Jung)和拉康(Lacan?精神分析。目前的争论触及了一些与心理治疗中逻辑模态、直觉和科学性之间关系相关的概念困境,所有这些都是心理治疗的哲学基础的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Modal logic in integrative philosophical practice
The paper discusses the differences between a practical emphasis on binary logic on the one hand, and modal logic, on the other, specifically in the fields of philosophical practice and psychotherapy. Although studies of practical applications of modal logic in the helping professions are recent, the discussion largely revolves around the controversial application of modality in psychotherapy by C.G. Jung and Lacan?s psychoanalysis. The present argument touches on some of the conceptual dilemmas associated with the relationship between logical modality, intuition and scientificity in psychotherapy, all of which are a part of the philosophical foundation of psychotherapy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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