100 punkti
Autor soovib selle materjali allalaadimise eest saada 100 punkti.
~ 35 lehte
Lehekülgede arv dokumendis
2017-06-27
Kuupäev, millal dokument üles laeti
4 laadimist
Kokku alla laetud
0 arvamust
Teiste kasutajate poolt lisatud kommentaarid
Nimeta
Õppematerjali autor
Philosophy of Language Philosophy of Language: a Contemporary Introduction introduces the student to the main issues and theories in twentieth and twenty-first-century phi- losophy of language, focusing specifically on linguistic phenomena. Topics are structured in four parts in the book. Part I, Reference and Referring, includes topics such as Russell's Theory of Descriptions, Donnellan's distinction, problems of anaphora, the description theory of proper names, Searle's cluster theory, and the causalhistorical theory. Part II, Theories of Meaning, surveys the competing theories of linguistic mean- ing and compares their various advantages and liabilities. Part III, Pragmatics and Speech Acts, introduces the basic concepts of linguistic pragmatics, includes a detailed discussion of the problem of indirect force and surveys approaches to metaphor. Part IV, new to this edition, examines the four theories of metaphor. Features of Philosophy of Language include: · new c
Philosophy Aristotle - four causes or better "becauses" because they are the 4 ways in which we use the word "because" or answer the question "why?" 1. Material cause: - what it is made of - why is the bridge strong? because made of steel 2. Formal cause: - what form, definition or property it has - why is this salt? because made of sodium and chloride 3. Efficient cause: - what initiated the change or movement - why did the baseball move? because someone hit it 4. Final cause: - what end or goal does it have? - why does he walk? because he wants to be healthy - also nature operates in terms of final causes - things don't happen spontaneously, every action that nature takes is for the sake of something, everything has a purpose - where a series has a completion, all th
TEKST 2. Durbin, Paul T. (1984). A Guide to The Culture of Science, Technology, 3. Broad Synthetic vs. Narrow Analytic. Third, one may approach science and Medicine. The Free Press. pp. 217-222. (Katkendid) from a narrow analytic or a broad synthetic point of view. That is, one could see one's task as primarily dissecting various features of science to see how they look or work, or C. Frameworks for Philosophy of Science as primarily locating science within a broader framework of human activities and artifacts. Questions about, for example, the form and function of scientific explanations In this section our aim is to examine alternative approaches to the philosophy of would be relevant to th
Law-makers breaking the law: torture as a justified interrogation technique? 1 Introduction It was Jeremy Bentham who thought of a famous method to give ethics a rational basis. He was fed up with the penal laws where offenders met corporate punishment and together with Cesario Beccaria he stood up to torture, corporal punishment, and the death penalty. He resisted against irrational moral emotions as the instigation for ethical conduct, saying only reasonable grounds could justify the moral decisions of individuals and legislators. And now his theory of is the one that is known for justifying torture (Verplaetse, 2008). Since 9/11 and the following fight against terrorism it became clear that the Bush administration thought of torture as something justifiable while it goes against all possible agreed upon treaties and conventions. One could indeed possibly think of situations that could serve as an exception to
Education Education is so multifaceted that it is difficult for me to know where to begin discussing it, or how to prioritize the many factors. Relaying my own experience is easy: I had a standard classroom approach, supplemented by inordinate reading. In only the briefest and least memorable instances did I receive any individual tutoring. Education is commonly thought of as the job of schools. Adults cry "educate our children!" Everyone has opinions about the best way to do the job. It is of urgent importance, and all the numerous factors are much studied, debated, and new (or old) ideas continually tested or retested. Some people say "it's as simple as . . . " and then name their pet peeve or passion. My view is not of an education specialist, but of one who loves sharing what I learn, and owes much to educators. Since I don't have an educational theory neatly worked-out, nor an outline of my perceptions, my intent is to address each educational ingredient that comes to my m
Questions for the First Philosophy Test a. Introduction 1. How would you characterize Modern philosophy? Commanding outlook, power, will, Man is God. 2. How would you characterize Classical philosophy? Contemplative outlook, truth, intelligence, God is truth. b. Descartes 3. What is the main question that Descartes is trying to answer? How can I be certain [sure] that I am in the truth? 4. Which are precepts of Descartes' method? Only accept what is self-evident. Analysis. Synthesis. Enumeration. 5. Descartes will only accept one specific kind of ideas: which and why? He will only accept clear and distinct ideas that are indubitable. Because the complex ideas could then be constructed using the simple ideas. 6. How does Descartes call his method and why is it not skeptical? Methodic doubt. Because the goal of this doubt is not to be skeptical but to prove that some things can not be doubted. 7. “I think, therefore I am”. What does this phras
1. What is the object of philosophical study? The object of philosophical study is being itself on an abstract level. Everything and nothing can be or exist. Things like colour, nature, material things like a table just are, but the meaning of being in be-ing in itself is unclear. Non Material things can also be or exist. If something is, then it is a being. But what exactly is this IS that we can see or on the opposite can not see? Therefore this is one of the fundamental questions of philosophy. 2. Can you reject solipsism? Solipsism (solus ipse) means nothing exists, therefore everything is an illusion outside of our own minds. I think that it is true that we know WE as in myself exists. But i can not for certain say that the person reading this exists although it might seems like it to me. I think that you really can’t reject solipsism on the whole because you do know that you exists, but can you for certain say that anybody else does? It may as well be just an
1. What does the word “philosophy” mean? The study of proper behaviour and the search for wisdom, in greek means love for wisdom 2. Is philosophy a science? Why? What kind of science it is? Yes it is. It tries to understand the meaning of reality. It’s the science of truth. Science, as it exists today, happens within the framework of philosophy. Philosophy, however, is bigger than science. It is also a form of art and discipline…... 3. Name three characteristics of Classical philosophy? deeply rooted in religious traditions ; believes that inferior was created by superior ; more positive ; seeks the real truth ; about intelligence ; reaalsuse üle mõtisklus ; believes that god is truth 4. Name three characteristics of Modern philosophy. believes that superior was created by inferior (!) ; more negative ; about will ; power ; domain of reality ; believes that knowledge is truth ; man is god 5. What was the problem that the first philosophers tried to solve? The problem of m
annaabi.ee 
Sisene Facebook'ga
Sisene Google'ga
Sisene LinkedIn'ga
Kõik kommentaarid