Использование семантики В. Эдельберга в методологии истории философии. Часть I: постановка проблемы

Статья в Elpub

Вестник Томского государственного университета. 2018; : 69-81

Использование семантики В. Эдельберга в методологии истории философии. Часть I: постановка проблемы

Аннотация

Анализируется противостояние между двумя методологиями истории философии - историцизмом (контекстуализмом) и апроприационизмом. Показывается, что одним из оснований этого противостояния являются различные в этих двух лагерях ответы на вопрос о возможности использования понятий и концепций философов минувших эпох в современных дискуссиях. Эти разногласия излагаются в виде, пригодном для последующей формализации с использованием семантики В. Эдельберга.

Список литературы

1. Смит Р. История гуманитарных наук. М. : Изд. дом ГУ ВШЭ, 2008.

2. Вольф М.Н. Современные дискуссии об истории философии: противостояние текста и контекста // Сибирский философский журнал. 2017. Т. 15, № 3. С. 237-257.

3. King P. Historical Contextualism: The New Historicism? // History of European Ideas. 1995. Vol. 21, № 2. P. 209-233.

4. Quine W.V.O. Quantifiers and Propositional Attitudes // The Journal of Philosophy. 1956. Vol. 53, № 5. P. 177-187.

5. Geach P.T. Intentional Identity // The Journal of Philosophy. 1967. Vol. 64, № 20. P. 627-632.

6. Saarinen E. Intentional Identity Interpreted: A Case Study of the Relations Among Quantifiers, Pronouns, and Propositional Attitudes // Linguistics and Philosophy. 1978. Vol. 2. P. 151-213.

7. Edelberg W. A Perspectivalist Semantics for Attitudes // Nous. 1995. Vol. 29, № 3. P. 316-342.

8. Aristoteles. De Xenophane, de Zenone, de Gorgia // Aristotelis opera / Bekker I. Berlin : Reimer, 1831. Vol. 2. P. 202-206.

9. Вольф М.Н. Трактат О не-сущем, или О природе Горгия в De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia, V-VI: Условно-формальная структура и перевод // Schole. Философское антиковедение и классическая традиция. 2014. Т. 8, вып. 2. С. 152-169.

10. Берестов И.В. Аргументы Горгия Леонтийского как свидетельство философской значимости проблемы интенционального тождества // Вестник Томского государственного университета. Серия: Философия. Социология. Политология. 2016. № 2 (34). С. 259-268.

11. Берестов И.В. Холистические предпосылки в третьем аргументе трактата Горгия «О не-сущем» // Вестник Томского государственного университета. Серия: Философия. Социология. Политология. 2016. № 4 (36). С. 28-38.

12. Eskildsen K.R. Leopold Ranke's Archival Turn: Location and Evidence in Modern Historiography // Modern Intellectual History. 2008. Vol. 5, iss. 3. P. 425-453.

13. Collingwood R.G. The Idea of History. Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1946.

14. MacIntyre A. The Relationship of Philosophy to Its Past // Philosophy in History: Essays on the Historiography of Philosophy / ed. by Richard Rorty, J.B. Schneewind and Quentin Skinner. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1984. P. 31-48.

15. Рорти Р. Философия и зеркало природы. Новосибирск : Изд-во Новосиб. гос. ун-та, 1997. 320 с.

16. Pocock J.G.A. The History of Political Thought : A Methodological Enquiry // Philosophy, Pokitics and Society, second series / Ed. by P. Laslett and W. Runciman. Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1962. P. 183-202.

17. Skinner Q. Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas // Meaning and Context. Quentin Skinner and His Critics / Ed. by J. Tully. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1988. P. 29-67.

18. Zarka Y. Ch. The Ideology of Context: Uses and Abuses of Context in the Historiography of Philosophy // Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy / Ed. by T. Sorell and G.A.G. Rogers. New York : Oxford University Press, 2005. P. 147-159.

19. Бивир М. Роль контекстов в понимании и объяснении // История понятий, история дискурса, история менталитета / под ред. Ханса Эриха Бёдекера; пер. с нем. М. : Новое литературное обозрение, 2010. С. 112-152.

20. Panaccio C. De la reconstruction en histoire de la philosophie // La philosophie et son histoire / Boss G., editeur. Zurich, 1994. P. 294-312.

21. Флаш К. Как писать историю средневековой философии? К дискуссии Клода Паначчио и Алена де Либера о философской ценности историко-философских исследований // Логос. 2009. № 4-5 (72). С. 224-246.

22. Randall J.H. The Career of Philosophy. Vol. I: From the Middle Ages to the Enlightenment. New York : Columbia University Press, 1962.

23. Passmor J. The Idea of a History of Philosophy // The Historiography of the History of Philosophy, History and Theory. The Hague: Mouton, 1965 (Ser. Studies in the Philosophy of History, Iss. 5). P. 1-32.

24. Рассел Б. Проблемы философии / пер. с англ. В.В. Целищева. Новосибирск : Наука, 2001. 111 с.

25. Bennett J. Learning from Six Philosophers: Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume : In 2 v. Oxford and New York : Oxford University Press, 2001. Vol. 1. P. 1.

26. Philosophy and Its History: Aims and Methods in the Study of Early Modern Philosophy / ed. by Mogens L®rke, Justin E.H. Smith, and Eric Schliesser. New York : Oxford University Press, 2013.

27. Hatfield G. The History of Philosophy as Philosophy // Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy / Ed. by T. Sorell and G.A.G. Rogers. New York : Oxford University Press, 2005. P. 83-128.

28. Рорти Р. Историография философии: четыре жанра // Джохадзе И.Д. Неопрагматизм Р. Рорти. М., 2001.

29. Вольф М.Н. Методологические споры вокруг истории философии: контекстуализм или апроприационизм? // Философия и наука: проблемы соотнесения: материалы межд. конф. Алёшинские чтения - 2016. 2-е изд., испр. М. : Изд-во Рос. гос. гуманит. ун-та, 2017. С. 393-400

30. Вольф М.Н. Историография истории философии как модус аналитической истории философии // Сибирский философский журнал. 2018. Т. 16, № 2. С. 189-200.

31. Goldenbaum U. Understanding the Argument through Then-Current Public Debates or My Detective Method of History of Philosophy // Philosophy and Its History: Aims and Methods in the Study of Early Modern Philosophy / ed. by Mogens L®rke, Justin E.H. Smith, and Eric Schliesser. New York : Oxford University Press, 2013. P. 71-90.

32. Cottinham J. Why Should Analytic Philosophers Do History of Philosophy? // Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy / Ed. by T. Sorell and G.A.G. Rogers. New York : Oxford University Press, 2005. P. 25-41.

33. Sorell T. On Saying No to History of Philosophy // Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy / Ed. by T. Sorell and G.A.G. Rogers. New York : Oxford University Press, 2005. P. 43-59.

34. KrUger L. Why Do We Study the History of Philosophy? // Philosophy in History: Essays on the Historiography of Philosophy / ed. by Richard Rorty, J.B. Schneewind and Quentin Skinner. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1984. P. 77-101.

35. Vermeir K. Philosophy and Genealogy: Ways of Writing History of Philosophy // Philosophy and Its History: Aims and Methods in the Study of Early Modern Philosophy / ed. by Mogens L®rke, Justin E.H. Smith, and Eric Schliesser. New York : Oxford University Press, 2013. P. 50-69.

36. Рокмор Т. Заметки об истории философии и ее отношении к философскому «духу времени» (Zeitgeist) // История философии: вызовы XXI века / под ред. Н.В. Мотрошиловой. М. : «Канон+» РООИ «Реабилитация», 2014. С. 64-79.

Tomsk State University Journal. 2018; : 69-81

Application of Walter Edelberg's perspectivalist semantics in the methodology of the history of philosophy. Part I: A statement of the problem

Berestov I. V.

Abstract

In this article, the author analyses the collision between the two methodologies of the history of philosophy - historicism (contex-tualism) and appropriationism. The author shows that one of the reasons for this collision is the answers to the question: Is the application of the concepts of past philosophers in contemporary discussions possible? There are powerful arguments for the difference of the objects of ancient philosophers from the objects discussed by modern ones, and for the necessity of the study of the application of ancient objects in modern discussions. The author shows that one of the reason for collision between historists (contextualists) and appropriationists is the difference in answers given in these two camps to the question of the possibility of application of the concepts and conceptions of past philosophers in contemporary discussions. The author sets forth these differences in a form suitable for subsequent formalisation by means of W. Edelberg's perspectivalist semantics. As the author shows, one can treat the two opposing positions in such a way (based on W. Edelberg's perspectivalist semantics) that these positions are completely compatible. As the author hopes, this will stop the recurring disputes between the two camps and lead the discussion to a new, more thoughtful level. Moreover, this approach preserves the very powerful arguments cited by both camps in favour of their own positions, which would be very problematic to discard. In order to implement this approach, one has to answer the questions: "In what sense the difference of the objects in different belief systems does not prevent these objects from their involvement in up-to-date discussions?", "What is the meaning of the sentence and the meaning of terms in a philosophical text?". Also one has to determine necessary and sufficient conditions for the existence of an analogue of an object from the belief system of one philosopher in the belief system of another philosopher. In order to achieve the goal, the author proposes to treat the historicist and contextualists as accepting Edelberg's first thesis that there are no identical objects in two different belief systems, and to treat the appropriationists as accepting Edelberg's second thesis that an object from one belief system can have an analogue in another belief system. In the present paper, the author implements only the first part of the set tasks, stopping at the conditions that define the model built after one of Edelberg's models. In the next paper, the author will continue building the model, after which he will indicate how it answers the questions posed.

References

1. Smit R. Istoriya gumanitarnykh nauk. M. : Izd. dom GU VShE, 2008.

2. Vol'f M.N. Sovremennye diskussii ob istorii filosofii: protivostoyanie teksta i konteksta // Sibirskii filosofskii zhurnal. 2017. T. 15, № 3. S. 237-257.

3. King P. Historical Contextualism: The New Historicism? // History of European Ideas. 1995. Vol. 21, № 2. P. 209-233.

4. Quine W.V.O. Quantifiers and Propositional Attitudes // The Journal of Philosophy. 1956. Vol. 53, № 5. P. 177-187.

5. Geach P.T. Intentional Identity // The Journal of Philosophy. 1967. Vol. 64, № 20. P. 627-632.

6. Saarinen E. Intentional Identity Interpreted: A Case Study of the Relations Among Quantifiers, Pronouns, and Propositional Attitudes // Linguistics and Philosophy. 1978. Vol. 2. P. 151-213.

7. Edelberg W. A Perspectivalist Semantics for Attitudes // Nous. 1995. Vol. 29, № 3. P. 316-342.

8. Aristoteles. De Xenophane, de Zenone, de Gorgia // Aristotelis opera / Bekker I. Berlin : Reimer, 1831. Vol. 2. P. 202-206.

9. Vol'f M.N. Traktat O ne-sushchem, ili O prirode Gorgiya v De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia, V-VI: Uslovno-formal'naya struktura i perevod // Schole. Filosofskoe antikovedenie i klassicheskaya traditsiya. 2014. T. 8, vyp. 2. S. 152-169.

10. Berestov I.V. Argumenty Gorgiya Leontiiskogo kak svidetel'stvo filosofskoi znachimosti problemy intentsional'nogo tozhdestva // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya. 2016. № 2 (34). S. 259-268.

11. Berestov I.V. Kholisticheskie predposylki v tret'em argumente traktata Gorgiya «O ne-sushchem» // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriya: Filosofiya. Sotsiologiya. Politologiya. 2016. № 4 (36). S. 28-38.

12. Eskildsen K.R. Leopold Ranke's Archival Turn: Location and Evidence in Modern Historiography // Modern Intellectual History. 2008. Vol. 5, iss. 3. P. 425-453.

13. Collingwood R.G. The Idea of History. Oxford : Clarendon Press, 1946.

15. Rorti R. Filosofiya i zerkalo prirody. Novosibirsk : Izd-vo Novosib. gos. un-ta, 1997. 320 s.

17. Skinner Q. Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas // Meaning and Context. Quentin Skinner and His Critics / Ed. by J. Tully. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1988. P. 29-67.

19. Bivir M. Rol' kontekstov v ponimanii i ob\"yasnenii // Istoriya ponyatii, istoriya diskursa, istoriya mentaliteta / pod red. Khansa Erikha Bedekera; per. s nem. M. : Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 2010. S. 112-152.

20. Panaccio C. De la reconstruction en histoire de la philosophie // La philosophie et son histoire / Boss G., editeur. Zurich, 1994. P. 294-312.

21. Flash K. Kak pisat' istoriyu srednevekovoi filosofii? K diskussii Kloda Panachchio i Alena de Libera o filosofskoi tsennosti istoriko-filosofskikh issledovanii // Logos. 2009. № 4-5 (72). S. 224-246.

22. Randall J.H. The Career of Philosophy. Vol. I: From the Middle Ages to the Enlightenment. New York : Columbia University Press, 1962.

24. Rassel B. Problemy filosofii / per. s angl. V.V. Tselishcheva. Novosibirsk : Nauka, 2001. 111 s.

25. Bennett J. Learning from Six Philosophers: Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Locke, Berkeley, Hume : In 2 v. Oxford and New York : Oxford University Press, 2001. Vol. 1. P. 1.

26. Philosophy and Its History: Aims and Methods in the Study of Early Modern Philosophy / ed. by Mogens L®rke, Justin E.H. Smith, and Eric Schliesser. New York : Oxford University Press, 2013.

27. Hatfield G. The History of Philosophy as Philosophy // Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy / Ed. by T. Sorell and G.A.G. Rogers. New York : Oxford University Press, 2005. P. 83-128.

28. Rorti R. Istoriografiya filosofii: chetyre zhanra // Dzhokhadze I.D. Neopragmatizm R. Rorti. M., 2001.

29. Vol'f M.N. Metodologicheskie spory vokrug istorii filosofii: kontekstualizm ili apropriatsionizm? // Filosofiya i nauka: problemy sootneseniya: materialy mezhd. konf. Aleshinskie chteniya - 2016. 2-e izd., ispr. M. : Izd-vo Ros. gos. gumanit. un-ta, 2017. S. 393-400

30. Vol'f M.N. Istoriografiya istorii filosofii kak modus analiticheskoi istorii filosofii // Sibirskii filosofskii zhurnal. 2018. T. 16, № 2. S. 189-200.

33. Sorell T. On Saying No to History of Philosophy // Analytic Philosophy and History of Philosophy / Ed. by T. Sorell and G.A.G. Rogers. New York : Oxford University Press, 2005. P. 43-59.

36. Rokmor T. Zametki ob istorii filosofii i ee otnoshenii k filosofskomu «dukhu vremeni» (Zeitgeist) // Istoriya filosofii: vyzovy XXI veka / pod red. N.V. Motroshilovoi. M. : «Kanon+» ROOI «Reabilitatsiya», 2014. S. 64-79.