语言规范性与交际分析——对反对语言学生物心理学基础的回应

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Jonathan J. Life
{"title":"语言规范性与交际分析——对反对语言学生物心理学基础的回应","authors":"Jonathan J. Life","doi":"10.22381/lpi1620173","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"1.The Objection from Linguistic NormsThe Scientific and Manifest Images of LanguageThis paper considers how a scientific understanding of language fits together with our everyday, commonsense understanding of language, according to which language is used for communication between persons, and follows or fails to follow certain essentially normative constraints.The scientific view of the world poses a theoretical threat to our commonsense understanding of our place in it as persons. As Sellars writes in \"Philosophy and the Scientific Image of Man:\"Does the manifest image of man-in-the-world survive the attempt to unite this image in one field of intellectual vision with man as conceived in terms of the postulated objects of scientific theory? The bite to this question lies, we have seen, in the fact that man is that being which conceives of itself in terms of the manifest image. To the extent that the manifest does not survive in the synoptic view, to that extent man himself would not survive (18).Something similar could be said regarding the manifest image of human language. The image of language as normative (as opposed to merely descriptive), personal (as opposed to merely sub-personal), social (as opposed to merely individual), and serving communication (as opposed to merely serving thought) would be lost if not shown consistent, somehow, with its scientific counterpart.Because the use of language is important to the commonsense understanding of human beings as persons, consideration of Sellars' analysis of the scientific and manifest images of human beings is relevant to the apparent conflicts between the scientific and manifest images of language.Humans appear in different ways to different sciences. We have images in social science, psychology, physiology, biochemistry, and all the way down to physics, in which we appear as \"a swirl of physical particles, forces, and fields\" (Sellars, \"Philosophy and the Scientific Image of Man,\" 20). \"The\" scientific image of humans is an idealization of the bringing together of these various special images. All of them, and thus \"the\" scientific image itself, Sellars writes \"are to be contrasted with man as he appears to himself in sophisticated common sense, the manifest image which even today contains most of what he knows about himself at the properly human level\" (20).Though, historically, the scientific image of human beings and of the world in general grows out of a basis in their manifest image, once generated and developed, the scientific image presents itself as a rival, conflicting with the theory and ontology of the manifest image. Though the scientific image of the world stems from the manifest image as an historical basis, it also views the manifest image itself as an object in the world and, from the lens of the scientific image, this manifest image is at best a pragmatically useful approximation of ultimate scientific reality (Sellars, 20).The conflict of the scientific and manifest images of human beings, Sellars notes, leave us with a seemingly inescapable trilemma. We are apparently forced to choose between: \"(a) a dualism in which men as scientific objects are contrasted with the 'minds' which are the source and principle of their existence as persons; (b) abandoning the reality of persons as well as manifest physical objects in favor of the exclusive reality of scientific objects; (c) returning once and for all to the thesis of the merely 'calculational' or 'auxiliary' status of theoretical frameworks and to the affirmation of the primacy of the manifest image\" (38-9).To accept (a) means resorting to an outdated, Cartesian conception of the human mind, at best rendering the scientific image incomplete, and at worst leaving our fundamental conception of personhood a mere epiphenomenon. To accept (b) is simply to eliminate our fundamental conception of personhood altogether. And to accept (c) is to rob the scientific enterprise of its claim to legitimately pursuing truth. …","PeriodicalId":53498,"journal":{"name":"Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations","volume":"16 1","pages":"49"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Analysis of Linguistic Normativity and Communication as a Response to Objections to a Biopsychological Foundation for Linguistics\",\"authors\":\"Jonathan J. Life\",\"doi\":\"10.22381/lpi1620173\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"1.The Objection from Linguistic NormsThe Scientific and Manifest Images of LanguageThis paper considers how a scientific understanding of language fits together with our everyday, commonsense understanding of language, according to which language is used for communication between persons, and follows or fails to follow certain essentially normative constraints.The scientific view of the world poses a theoretical threat to our commonsense understanding of our place in it as persons. As Sellars writes in \\\"Philosophy and the Scientific Image of Man:\\\"Does the manifest image of man-in-the-world survive the attempt to unite this image in one field of intellectual vision with man as conceived in terms of the postulated objects of scientific theory? The bite to this question lies, we have seen, in the fact that man is that being which conceives of itself in terms of the manifest image. To the extent that the manifest does not survive in the synoptic view, to that extent man himself would not survive (18).Something similar could be said regarding the manifest image of human language. The image of language as normative (as opposed to merely descriptive), personal (as opposed to merely sub-personal), social (as opposed to merely individual), and serving communication (as opposed to merely serving thought) would be lost if not shown consistent, somehow, with its scientific counterpart.Because the use of language is important to the commonsense understanding of human beings as persons, consideration of Sellars' analysis of the scientific and manifest images of human beings is relevant to the apparent conflicts between the scientific and manifest images of language.Humans appear in different ways to different sciences. We have images in social science, psychology, physiology, biochemistry, and all the way down to physics, in which we appear as \\\"a swirl of physical particles, forces, and fields\\\" (Sellars, \\\"Philosophy and the Scientific Image of Man,\\\" 20). \\\"The\\\" scientific image of humans is an idealization of the bringing together of these various special images. All of them, and thus \\\"the\\\" scientific image itself, Sellars writes \\\"are to be contrasted with man as he appears to himself in sophisticated common sense, the manifest image which even today contains most of what he knows about himself at the properly human level\\\" (20).Though, historically, the scientific image of human beings and of the world in general grows out of a basis in their manifest image, once generated and developed, the scientific image presents itself as a rival, conflicting with the theory and ontology of the manifest image. Though the scientific image of the world stems from the manifest image as an historical basis, it also views the manifest image itself as an object in the world and, from the lens of the scientific image, this manifest image is at best a pragmatically useful approximation of ultimate scientific reality (Sellars, 20).The conflict of the scientific and manifest images of human beings, Sellars notes, leave us with a seemingly inescapable trilemma. We are apparently forced to choose between: \\\"(a) a dualism in which men as scientific objects are contrasted with the 'minds' which are the source and principle of their existence as persons; (b) abandoning the reality of persons as well as manifest physical objects in favor of the exclusive reality of scientific objects; (c) returning once and for all to the thesis of the merely 'calculational' or 'auxiliary' status of theoretical frameworks and to the affirmation of the primacy of the manifest image\\\" (38-9).To accept (a) means resorting to an outdated, Cartesian conception of the human mind, at best rendering the scientific image incomplete, and at worst leaving our fundamental conception of personhood a mere epiphenomenon. To accept (b) is simply to eliminate our fundamental conception of personhood altogether. And to accept (c) is to rob the scientific enterprise of its claim to legitimately pursuing truth. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":53498,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations\",\"volume\":\"16 1\",\"pages\":\"49\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22381/lpi1620173\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22381/lpi1620173","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1.语言规范的反对语言规范的科学形象本文探讨的是对语言的科学理解如何与我们日常生活中对语言的常识性理解相吻合,根据这种常识性理解,语言是用于人与人之间的交流的,并遵循或不遵循某些本质上规范的约束。科学的世界观对我们作为人在世界上的位置的常识性理解构成了理论上的威胁。正如塞拉斯在《哲学与科学的人的形象》中所写的那样:“人类在世界上的明显形象,在试图将这种形象与科学理论的假设对象所设想的人类统一在一个智力视野领域时,是否能够幸存下来?”我们已经看到,这个问题的尖锐之处在于,人就是按照明显的形象来设想自己的存在。在某种程度上,manifest不能在对观观中存活,在某种程度上,人自己也不能存活(18)。关于人类语言的显象,也可以说类似的东西。语言作为规范性的(相对于仅仅描述性的)、个人的(相对于仅仅次个人的)、社会的(相对于仅仅个人的)和服务于交流的(相对于仅仅服务于思想的)的形象,如果不以某种方式与其科学对应物保持一致,就会丢失。由于语言的使用对人类作为人的常识理解很重要,因此考虑塞拉斯对人类的科学形象和表现形象的分析,与语言的科学形象和表现形象之间的明显冲突有关。人类以不同的方式出现在不同的科学中。我们在社会科学、心理学、生理学、生物化学一直到物理学中都有图像,在这些图像中,我们以“物理粒子、力和场的漩涡”的形式出现(塞拉斯,“哲学和人类的科学图像”,20)。“科学的”人类形象是这些不同的特殊形象集合的理想化。塞拉斯写道,所有这些,以及“科学形象本身”,“都要与人类形成对比,因为他在复杂的常识中对自己表现出来,即使在今天,这个明显的形象也包含了他在适当的人类层面上对自己的大部分了解”(20)。虽然历史上,人类和整个世界的科学形象都是从他们的显象中产生和发展起来的,但科学形象一旦产生和发展起来,就会表现为与显象的理论和本体论相冲突的对手。虽然世界的科学形象源于作为历史基础的明显形象,但它也将明显形象本身视为世界中的一个对象,从科学形象的角度来看,这种明显形象充其量是对最终科学现实的实用有用的近似(Sellars, 20)。塞拉斯指出,人类的科学形象和外在形象之间的冲突,给我们留下了一个看似无法逃脱的三难困境。显然,我们不得不在以下两者之间作出选择:(a)二元论,在这种二元论中,作为科学对象的人与作为他们作为人而存在的根源和原则的“心灵”相对立;(b)放弃人的实在性和明显的物理对象的实在性,而赞成科学对象的唯一实在性;(c)一劳永逸地回到理论框架仅仅是‘计算的’或‘辅助的’地位的论点,并肯定明显形象的首要地位”(38-9)。接受(a)意味着诉诸于一种过时的、笛卡尔式的人类心灵的概念,往好了说,使科学的形象不完整,往坏了说,使我们关于人格的基本概念成为一种附带现象。接受(b)就是完全消除我们对人格的基本概念。而接受(c)则剥夺了科学事业合法追求真理的权利。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
An Analysis of Linguistic Normativity and Communication as a Response to Objections to a Biopsychological Foundation for Linguistics
1.The Objection from Linguistic NormsThe Scientific and Manifest Images of LanguageThis paper considers how a scientific understanding of language fits together with our everyday, commonsense understanding of language, according to which language is used for communication between persons, and follows or fails to follow certain essentially normative constraints.The scientific view of the world poses a theoretical threat to our commonsense understanding of our place in it as persons. As Sellars writes in "Philosophy and the Scientific Image of Man:"Does the manifest image of man-in-the-world survive the attempt to unite this image in one field of intellectual vision with man as conceived in terms of the postulated objects of scientific theory? The bite to this question lies, we have seen, in the fact that man is that being which conceives of itself in terms of the manifest image. To the extent that the manifest does not survive in the synoptic view, to that extent man himself would not survive (18).Something similar could be said regarding the manifest image of human language. The image of language as normative (as opposed to merely descriptive), personal (as opposed to merely sub-personal), social (as opposed to merely individual), and serving communication (as opposed to merely serving thought) would be lost if not shown consistent, somehow, with its scientific counterpart.Because the use of language is important to the commonsense understanding of human beings as persons, consideration of Sellars' analysis of the scientific and manifest images of human beings is relevant to the apparent conflicts between the scientific and manifest images of language.Humans appear in different ways to different sciences. We have images in social science, psychology, physiology, biochemistry, and all the way down to physics, in which we appear as "a swirl of physical particles, forces, and fields" (Sellars, "Philosophy and the Scientific Image of Man," 20). "The" scientific image of humans is an idealization of the bringing together of these various special images. All of them, and thus "the" scientific image itself, Sellars writes "are to be contrasted with man as he appears to himself in sophisticated common sense, the manifest image which even today contains most of what he knows about himself at the properly human level" (20).Though, historically, the scientific image of human beings and of the world in general grows out of a basis in their manifest image, once generated and developed, the scientific image presents itself as a rival, conflicting with the theory and ontology of the manifest image. Though the scientific image of the world stems from the manifest image as an historical basis, it also views the manifest image itself as an object in the world and, from the lens of the scientific image, this manifest image is at best a pragmatically useful approximation of ultimate scientific reality (Sellars, 20).The conflict of the scientific and manifest images of human beings, Sellars notes, leave us with a seemingly inescapable trilemma. We are apparently forced to choose between: "(a) a dualism in which men as scientific objects are contrasted with the 'minds' which are the source and principle of their existence as persons; (b) abandoning the reality of persons as well as manifest physical objects in favor of the exclusive reality of scientific objects; (c) returning once and for all to the thesis of the merely 'calculational' or 'auxiliary' status of theoretical frameworks and to the affirmation of the primacy of the manifest image" (38-9).To accept (a) means resorting to an outdated, Cartesian conception of the human mind, at best rendering the scientific image incomplete, and at worst leaving our fundamental conception of personhood a mere epiphenomenon. To accept (b) is simply to eliminate our fundamental conception of personhood altogether. And to accept (c) is to rob the scientific enterprise of its claim to legitimately pursuing truth. …
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
Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations
Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
10.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
×
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