{"title":"有概念和没有概念的视觉","authors":"R. V. Woudenberg","doi":"10.1347/kris.8.1.71","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Zijn nieuwste boek The world observed/the world conceived heeft Hans Radder onder meer gewijd aan de relatie tussen zien (of observeren, of ervaren – deze begrippen zijn voor hem min of meer inwisselbaar, 3-4) en begrippen. De centrale stelling over deze relatie die hij met name in deel 1 uitwerkt en verdedigt, verwoordt hij op diverse manieren (daarbij soms formuleringen van anderen overnemend): (1) observation presupposes conceptual interpretation (1) (2) observation and conceptual interpretation are interconnected (1) (3) materially realized observational processes are always conceptually interpreted (1) (4) all observation requires conceptual interpretation (5; vgl. 25) (5) observing that p presupposes a certain conceptual, linguistic, or theoretical interpretation of p (13) (6) observing something always involves conceptual interpretation (15) (7) concepts, knowledge, language, and theory play an intermediary role in observation (22) (8) observation is essentially shaped by concepts (24) (9) all observation essentially requires conceptual interpretation (or organization/structuring); my revision of the theory ladenness thesis can be summarized in the claim that all observation involves seeing-as (25) (10) all human observation requires a conceptual interpretation of the materially realized observational processes (77) (11) conceptual interpretation structure(s) observational processes (81) (12) all seeing is conceptually interpreted (80) In mijn bijdrage wil ik eerst nagaan wat de centrale stelling precies inhoudt. Vervolgens wil ik de drie argumenten die Radder geeft voor die stelling analyseren. De algemene strekking van mijn betoog zal zijn dat deze argumenten de centrale stelling niet aannemelijk maken.","PeriodicalId":38842,"journal":{"name":"Krisis","volume":"100 1","pages":"71-81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Zien met en zonder begrippen\",\"authors\":\"R. V. Woudenberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1347/kris.8.1.71\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Zijn nieuwste boek The world observed/the world conceived heeft Hans Radder onder meer gewijd aan de relatie tussen zien (of observeren, of ervaren – deze begrippen zijn voor hem min of meer inwisselbaar, 3-4) en begrippen. De centrale stelling over deze relatie die hij met name in deel 1 uitwerkt en verdedigt, verwoordt hij op diverse manieren (daarbij soms formuleringen van anderen overnemend): (1) observation presupposes conceptual interpretation (1) (2) observation and conceptual interpretation are interconnected (1) (3) materially realized observational processes are always conceptually interpreted (1) (4) all observation requires conceptual interpretation (5; vgl. 25) (5) observing that p presupposes a certain conceptual, linguistic, or theoretical interpretation of p (13) (6) observing something always involves conceptual interpretation (15) (7) concepts, knowledge, language, and theory play an intermediary role in observation (22) (8) observation is essentially shaped by concepts (24) (9) all observation essentially requires conceptual interpretation (or organization/structuring); my revision of the theory ladenness thesis can be summarized in the claim that all observation involves seeing-as (25) (10) all human observation requires a conceptual interpretation of the materially realized observational processes (77) (11) conceptual interpretation structure(s) observational processes (81) (12) all seeing is conceptually interpreted (80) In mijn bijdrage wil ik eerst nagaan wat de centrale stelling precies inhoudt. Vervolgens wil ik de drie argumenten die Radder geeft voor die stelling analyseren. De algemene strekking van mijn betoog zal zijn dat deze argumenten de centrale stelling niet aannemelijk maken.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38842,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Krisis\",\"volume\":\"100 1\",\"pages\":\"71-81\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-05-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Krisis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1347/kris.8.1.71\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Krisis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1347/kris.8.1.71","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
Hans Radder的最新著作《观察的世界》(The world observed/ The world conceived)致力于观察(或观察，或体验——这些概念对他来说或多或少是可以互换的，3-4)和概念之间的关系。中央关于这种关系定理,他特别是在第一部分中制定和维护,以各种方式表达了他(有时配方的其他人的经济):(1)观测presupposes概念解释(1)(2)观测和概念解释are interconnected (1) (3) materially realized observational流程are always conceptually interpreted(1)(4)所有观测需要概念解释(5票;参看。25)(5)观测that ' p presupposes某些概念、语言、或理论解释p(13)(6)观测something always involves概念解释(15)(7)概念、知识、语言、观测和理论play an intermediary角色(22)(8)观测是essentially形状由概念(24)(9)所有观测essentially需要概念解释(or标准化组织/ structuring);my修订或the theory ladenness论文can be summarized in the索赔that all观测involves seeing-as(25)(10)所有人类观测需要一个概念的解释materially realized observational流程(77)(11)概念解释结构(s) observational流程(81)(12)all seeing is conceptually interpreted(80)在我的发言,我要首先检查中央定理到底意味着什么。接下来，我想分析Radder提出的三个论点。我的论点的主旨是，这些论点不能使中心论点可信。
Zijn nieuwste boek The world observed/the world conceived heeft Hans Radder onder meer gewijd aan de relatie tussen zien (of observeren, of ervaren – deze begrippen zijn voor hem min of meer inwisselbaar, 3-4) en begrippen. De centrale stelling over deze relatie die hij met name in deel 1 uitwerkt en verdedigt, verwoordt hij op diverse manieren (daarbij soms formuleringen van anderen overnemend): (1) observation presupposes conceptual interpretation (1) (2) observation and conceptual interpretation are interconnected (1) (3) materially realized observational processes are always conceptually interpreted (1) (4) all observation requires conceptual interpretation (5; vgl. 25) (5) observing that p presupposes a certain conceptual, linguistic, or theoretical interpretation of p (13) (6) observing something always involves conceptual interpretation (15) (7) concepts, knowledge, language, and theory play an intermediary role in observation (22) (8) observation is essentially shaped by concepts (24) (9) all observation essentially requires conceptual interpretation (or organization/structuring); my revision of the theory ladenness thesis can be summarized in the claim that all observation involves seeing-as (25) (10) all human observation requires a conceptual interpretation of the materially realized observational processes (77) (11) conceptual interpretation structure(s) observational processes (81) (12) all seeing is conceptually interpreted (80) In mijn bijdrage wil ik eerst nagaan wat de centrale stelling precies inhoudt. Vervolgens wil ik de drie argumenten die Radder geeft voor die stelling analyseren. De algemene strekking van mijn betoog zal zijn dat deze argumenten de centrale stelling niet aannemelijk maken.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
