CEEOL - Browse Subjects Result

We kindly inform you that, as long as the subject affiliation of our 300.000+ articles is in progress, you might get unsufficient or no results on your third level or second level search. In this case, please broaden your search criteria.

RAZLIKA IZMEĐU VERIFIKACIONISTIČKOG I FALSIFIKACIONISTIČKOG KRITERIJUMA DEMARKACIJE

Author(s): Anđela Bolta / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 1/2019

This paper illustrates the difference between falsificationistic and verificationistic principles of demarcation. Popper claimed that the falsificationistic criterion of demarcation is better than the verificationistic one. Therefore, he believed that his criterion should be more relevant when distinguishing scientific from nonscientific theories. Popper gave Freudian psychoanalysis as an example of a doctrine that would satisfy verificationistic, but not the falsificationistic criterion of demarcation. The aim of this paper is to thoroughly examine in which way both of demarcation criteria would treat psychoanalysis and to check if Popper’s criterion of demarcation is truly better than the verificationistic one.

More...

NIKO I NIŠTA: O ZNAČENJU NEGATIVNIH NEODREĐENIH ZAMENICA

Author(s): Miroslava Trajkovski / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 4/2018

In the paper, I deal with the comparison of the use of negative indefinite pronouns in languages with double negation with their usage in languages without double negation. In languages with double negation referential usage prevails, while in languages without double negation quantificational usage is prevalent. Double negation is often considered to be inconsistent with the understanding of quantification in standard logic. I show that languages in which negative indefinite pronouns are used are not logically weaker than languages in which this is not the case. Moreover, I show that the languages with double negation clearly distinguish between the referential and quantificational usage of negative indefinite pronouns, so that the grammar of these languages prevents referring to nonentities.

More...

LUISOVSKA ANALIZA OBJEKTIVNIH VEROVATNOĆA: RAZJAŠNJENJE PROBLEMA PODRIVAJUĆIH BUDUĆNOSTI

Author(s): Nenad Filipović / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 4/2018

David Lewis’ interpretation of objective probability has two essential parts: Humean supervenience and Best system of laws. According to his interpretation, probabilities, along with the other nomic phenomena, supervene on the actual facts. Lewis also famously formulated the Principal Principle, which should show the connection between objective and subjective probabilities. However, years later, Hall, Thau and Lewis himself came to conclusion that the principle and Lewis’ interpretation of probability are not compatible. The main reason for that is the problem of so called undermining futures: Lewis named the problem „Big Bad Bug“. A popular way to solve the problem was to change the principal principle. In this article, I will argue that the origin of the problem is not compatibility of the principle and Lewis’s interpretation of probability, but that the problem is in the interpretation itself. Changing the principle, I argue, will not conclusively solve the problem.

More...

POLEMIKA ALIMPIJA VASILJEVIĆA I MILANA KUJUNDŽIĆA ABERDARA (1865–1873)

Author(s): Boris Milosavljević / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 3/2018

In his lauding review of Dimitrije Matić’s (1821–1884) History of Philosophy (largely based on А. Schwegler), published in 1865 in the journal Vila, started and edited by Stojan Novaković (1842–1915), Alimpije Vasiljević (1831–1911) assessed the pattern of the book as one of the latest and best in the field. In his critical reaction to Vasiljević’s review, Milan Kujundžić (1842–1893) challenged his assessment. For the generation of the United Serbian Youth, Hegelianism was unacceptable for two reasons: because of increasingly influential positivism (naturalism) and scientism, and because of the strengthening of the ideology of Greater Germany with which it was equated. Both Vasiljević and Kujundžic were liberals. Their debate, however, was harsh and long, and the intellectual public followed it with “particular attention”. They polemicized about, inter alia, the actual philosophical relevance of the issue of idealism vs. materialism. Even though the debate showed inconsistencies and contradictions in argumentation, it led to independence in problem formulation and solving.

More...

THOUGHTS AS SUCH

Author(s): Vojislav Božičković / Language(s): English Issue: 2/2018

Sainsbury has contested the widespread view that Fregean senses as individuated by modes of presentation are capable of being individuated independently of the needs of semantics. He also holds that there are meanings as something similar to Fregean senses but individuated by a combination of the demands of a reported speech and a Fregean test in terms of rational cotenability (Sainsbury 2002, p. 155). In so doing, he claims that meanings can be finer-grained than senses (modes of presentation). But, in arguing in favour of this view, Sainsbury seems to individuate senses as modes of presentation on an independent basis. Having noticed this, my key point will be that, whether he individuates these modes on an independent basis or not, it is mysterious what role such modes are supposed to play. Following this, we shall see that the demands of a reported speech are of no help in establishing the point that Sainsbury wants to make. On the other hand, on the account that will I suggest senses as modes of presentation are introduced to play a specific role.

More...

EKSTERNALIZAM MISAONOG SADRŽAJA I SUBJEKTOVA TAČKA GLEDIŠTA

Author(s): Vojislav Božičković / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 1/2018

In relation to perception-based demonstrative thoughts, I argue that, their intentions notwithstanding, Fregean and non-Fregean anti-individualists alike fail to provide a theory of content that explains the subject’s cognitive perspective. I propose an individualist alternative that meets this requirement in conformity with the view that difference in thought-contents needs to be transparent, as does their sameness, if thought-content is to serve to explain the subject’s cognitive perspective.

More...

KONTEKSTUALIZAM I EKSTERNALIZAM U EPISTEMOLOŠKOJ TEORIJI MAJKLA VILIJAMSA

Author(s): Filip Čukljević / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 1/2018

In this paper I shall deal with the relation between the contextualist and externalist elements in the epistemological theory of Michael Williams. I shall claim that Williams did not clearly explicate the true nature of that relation. Firstly, I shall briefly present Williams’ contextualist theory. Then I shall expose Brian Ribeiro’s objection to Williams according to which externalism, and not contextualism, plays a key role in his theory. I shall argue against this objection. On the other hand, contrary to Williams, I shall claim that externalism is not a necessary consequence of contextualism. Williams’ theory is just an externalist version of the basic contextualist standpoint. Another, Wittgensteinian version is also possible. Finally, I shall show that Williams’ theory is not obviously better then Wittgensteinian one.

More...

RAZLIKE IZMEĐU KVAJNOVE I GIBSONOVE INTERPRETACIJE PROJEKTA NATURALISTIČKE EPISTEMOLOGIJE: KONSEKVENCE GIBSONOVOG NATURALIZMA

Author(s): Miloš Bogdanovic / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 1/2018

In this paper we will try to point out differencies between Quine’s and Gibson’s interpretation of the naturalized epistemology project. Namely, although his claim is that genetic approach which Quine advocated is the best strategy there is to investigate the relation between evidence and theory, and that externalizing of empiricism that it requires is one of Quine’s major philosophical contributions, apart from the fact that they would be in conflict with some strongly held intuitions, we think that assumptions on which Gibson’s project is based would have to be essentially different from Quine’s. In other words, contrary to Quine’s position within which we have possibility of staying on more moderate, and in our opinion, more plausible bihavioristic line of approach, we will try to show that one of the consequences of Gibson’s interpretation is that in Gibson’s case, that possibility is ruled out. On the other hand, this should enable us to draw some more radical conclusions about the nature of Quine’s epistemological project.

More...

DEFINING DISEASE: DESCRIPTION AND EXPLANATION IN THE NATURALIZATION OF THE CONCEPT OF DISEASE

Author(s): Ljiljana Radenović / Language(s): English Issue: 1/2017

In his paper “The naturalization of the concept of disease” (2015) M. Lemoine offers a constructive critique of the naturalist/normativist debate. He argues that philosophers of both camps attempt to define the concept of disease by relying on the pre-naturalized notion of the disease. These pre-naturalized concepts Lemoine identifies with mere phenomenal descriptions of the disease while naturalized ones defines as those that involve causal explanations. My main goal in this paper is to show that such distinction cannot be found within ontogenetic cognitive development or in the history of medical knowledge and as such is not viable. At the end of the paper I offer a different account of what went wrong with the naturalist/normativist. Unlike Lemoine, I propose that the definitions of disease that naturalists and normativists come up with are the result not of the analysis of some descriptive concepts of disease but rather of the armchair analysis with no footing in everyday practice of ordinary people or medical practitioners.

More...

O RAZLOZIMA ZA RAZLIKOVANJE ABDKUKCIJE OD ZAKLJUČIVANJA DO NAJBOLJEG OBJAŠNJENJA

Author(s): Vladimir Cakić / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 4/2016

Relationship between abduction and Inference to the Best Explanation is not sufficiently elaborated in contemporary literature. These terms are often unjustifiably considered to be synonymous. The aim of this paper is to articulate the meanings of these notions and make a clear distinction between them. It will be shown that, despite certain similarities, there are significant differences between abduction and Inference to the Best Explanation. Charles Sanders Peirce defines abduction as a kind of insight by which we discover new hypotheses, which are only potential explanations and truth of which is just assumed. Peirce sees the clear difference between abduction and induction. On the other hand, according to Peter Lipton, Inference to the Best Explanation is the kind of induction that compares potential explanations, filters the best one among them, and justifies our belief in its truth. We choose between available potential explanations and the best one of them is actual, i.e. true explanation. I argue that there are three significant differences between abduction and Inference to the Best Explanation: (1) their basic purposes, (2) strength of their conclusions, and (3) manner in which they function as processes.

More...

TRI PARADOKSA I RAZUMNO ZAKLJUČIVANJE

Author(s): Vladan Đorđević / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 1/2016

In a previous paper of mine I offered solutions to three paradoxes, two of which were solved in Stalnaker’s famous paper ’Indicative Conditionals’ in terms of his distinction between valid and reasonable inference. In a sense my solutions to the two paradoxes are very similar. In this paper I explain why, despite the similarity, I looked for a different solution and new distinctions. After explaining the similarity, I argue that my distinctions point to a more basic phenomenon, which I try to show by applying the distinctions to problems that cannot be solved in terms of Stalnaker’s distinction. The third paradox is one such problem. Beside that, each of the paradoxes, originally formulated in terms of indicative conditionals, can be formulated in terms of counterfactual conditionals. I solve these cases in exactly the same way, while Stalnaker’s distinction is not applicable to them.

More...

USES OF THE LANGUAGE OF MATHEMATICS

Author(s): Katarina Maksimović / Language(s): English Issue: 1/2016

In this paper I criticise the dogma that asserting and naming are the most important language uses in the language of mathematics. I present the later Wittgenstein and the intuitionists as the most eminent challengers of the dogma showing that both have to offer valuable arguments against it. Inspired by Kolmorov’s interpretation of intuitionistic logic I examine the connection between intuitionistic logic and imperative logic. Along the way I offer a solution to Jørgensen’s Dilemma rejecting another dogma, the dogma based on the belief that there could not be a deduction in which premises and conclusion are something other than propositions.

More...

FREGEOVSKO REŠENJE PARADOKSA ANALIZE I KRITERIJUM ZA RAZGRANIČENJE MISLI

Author(s): Filip Čukljević / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 1/2015

At the beginning of this essay a formulation of the paradox of analysis is presented. Standard Fregean solution of this paradox is then displayed, as well as the problems that this solution faces. Afterwords, another solution of the paradox of analysis is shown, which can be found in Frege's late writings. It will be demonstrated that this solution, at least at first sight, is incompatible with the criterion of difference of thoughts that is standardly attributed to Frege. In the end, a possible solution to this incompatibility is suggested.

More...

NEKONTEKSTUALISTIČKA I KONTEKSTUALISTIČKA VERZIJA TEORIJE RELEVANTNIH ALTERNATIVA KAO MOGUĆA REŠENJA SKEPTIČKOG PARADOKSA

Author(s): Milica Smajević / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 3/2014

This paper analyzes the solution to the skeptical paradox provided by theory of relevant alternatives. The paper examines and compares two versions of this solution: the noncontextualist, invariantist version, whose creator and representative is Fred Dretske, and contextualist, variantist version, defended by Keith DeRose and Stewart Cohen. By analyzing invariantist and variantist solution, the author comes to the conclusion that, although both solutions have positive and negative implications, Dretske`s theory of relevant alternatives offers more convincing explanation and solution to the skeptical paradox.

More...

A FORMAL SOLUTION TO A PARADOX OF DEMOCRACY

Author(s): Vlasta Sikimić / Language(s): English Issue: 2/2014

Richard Wollheim pointed out a paradox which he claims relates to democracy. We argue that this paradox is not exclusively related to democracy but actually arises whenever there is a conflict between personal preferences and preferences of accepted authorities. Furthermore, we provide a formal explanation of how one can rationally “accept” or “switch to” the preference of the authority she personally accepts and still have different preferences than the authority in question. Our formal solution is based on dynamic epistemic logic, while our philosophical explanation is inspired by Kant’s practical philosophy. On the other hand, we point out to what we believe to be the real exclusive restriction in democratic elections and we argue that, unlike Wollheim’s paradox, this restriction is a special feature of democracy.

More...

KVAJNOVA BIHEJVIORISTIČKA TEORIJA JEZIKA

Author(s): Aleksandra Zorić / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 1/2014

Within Quine’s philosophy, behaviorism is most present in the language learning context, both in children’s learning their native language and in translating an unknown language. It was directed against mentalistic semantics and referential theories of meaning. We will focus the examination of Quine’s behaviorism on the thesis of indeterminacy of translation, since there we will find all the elements necessary for further analysis. We will try to explicate the content of the thesis of indeterminacy of translation and point out the key problems which it faces. We will show exactly what kind of behaviorism Quine is defending and to what degree is his theory of language a successful alternative to mentalistic theories of meaning.

More...

Religion, Theology, and Philosophical Skills of LLM–Powered Chatbots

Author(s): Marcin Trepczyński / Language(s): English Issue: 1/2023

In this study, I demonstrate how religion and theology can be useful for testing the performance of LLMs or LLM–powered chatbots, focusing on the measurement of philosophical skills. I present the results of testing four selected chatbots: ChatGPT, Bing, Bard, and Llama2. I utilize three examples of possible sources of inspiration from religion or theology: 1) the theory of the four senses of Scripture; 2) abstract theological statements; 3) an abstract logic formula derived from a religious text, to show that these sources are good materials for tasks that can effectively measure philosophical skills such as interpretation of a given fragment, creative deductive reasoning, and identification of ontological limitations. This approach enabled sensitive testing, revealing differences among the performances of the four chatbots. I also provide an example showing how we can create a benchmark to rate and compare such skills, using the assessment criteria and simplified scales to rate each chatbot with respect to each criterion.

More...

Lametrijevo antropičko rezonovanje

Author(s): Goran Rujević / Language(s): Serbian Issue: 39/2023

Julien Offray de La Mettrie is considered a representative philosopher of materialism and hedonism in the Age of Enlightenment. His seminal work Man a Machine bears many hallmarks of the Enlightenment: faith in ratinality and progress, turning away from traditional figures of authority and towards the authority of natural sciences, and placing great value in the individual and self-improvement. Certain paragraphs of the work, however, contain claims that seemingly advocate that one ought to remain wholly ignorant when it comes to questions pertaining to reasons for man's existence. This appears to contradict the usual intelectual optimism of the Enlightenment. However, if we read these paragraphs through the lens of contemporary anthropic reasoning, it shows that this is just La Mettrie's attempt to counter certain theistic arguments, and fully in the spirit of the Enlightenment.

More...

The logical and pedagogical paths of phenomenology. Adalberto Garcia de Mendoza’s and Francisco Larroyo’s forays

Author(s): JORGE LUIS MÉNDEZ-MARTÍNEZ / Language(s): English Issue: 1/2024

This paper addresses the relationship between logic and phenomenology at a historical moment that precedes the big divide between analytic philosophy and phenomenology. In analysing alternative derivations of phenomenological logic, the discussion focuses on the case of two notorious neo-Kantian Mexican philosophers from the first half of the XXth century: Adalberto Garcia de Mendoza and Francisco Larroyo. It is argued that both Garcia de Mendoza and Larroyo made an original contribution to the discussion on the relationship between phenomenology and logic. Further, this paper attempts to present a charitable portrait of both Garcia de Mendoza and Larroyo in contrast to underrating approaches to both Mexican philosophers. In so doing, this paper adopts a historical—thought not strictly biographical— perspective. While it is true that neither Garcia de Mendoza nor Larroyo could be considered “phenomenologists” or “Husserl scholars” according to contemporary standards it is worth noticing that they engage in the discussion of phenomenological logic. Both authors had the project of developing a grounding logic for science and, as the article argues, both attempts could be even linked. Their project, however, was unfinished. The plan of this paper is as follows. The first section addresses the problem of the relationship between logic and phenomenology. The second one focuses on Garcia de Mendoza’s contributions. The third one elaborates on Larroyo’s Logic of Sciences. And, finally, the fourth section elaborates on these Mexican philosophers’ contributions to education, making as well further observations concerning the similarities and differences between both authors.

More...

Squaring “The rhetoric of temporality”: Greimassian semiotics and de Manian deconstruction

Author(s): Shawn Normandin / Language(s): English Issue: 3-4/2023

A careful study of the writings of Algirdas Julien Greimas refutes many of Paul de Man’s influential criticisms of semiotics. Greimassian narratology neither reduces rhetoric to grammar nor simply conflates grammar with logic. Instead of forming “a closed totality”, the Greimas square is an open-ended analytical device; it is not the semiotic equivalent of the Schillerian chiasmus. Despite de Man’s claims for the disruptive agency of rhetoric, the elementary structure of signification organizes the possibilities of de Man’s own rhetoric. His essay “The rhetoric of temporality” is a narrative whose four major actants are symbol, allegory, irony, and mimesis. Though the discoursive level of de Man’s essay represses mimesis, it is active in what Greimas would call the argument’s surface grammar, which constrains, without completely determining, the narrative transformations the argument undergoes. While de Man’s analysis regards symbol as epistemologically inferior to allegory and irony, the persistence of symbol helps make “The rhetoric of temporality” a fascinating literary text in its own right.

More...