Search (26 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Begriffstheorie"
  1. Axelos, C.; Flasch, K.; Schepers, H.; Kuhlen, R.; Romberg, R.; Zimmermann, R.: Allgemeines/Besonderes (1971-2007) 0.27 
    0.27259758 = product of:
  0.72692686 = sum of:
    0.24230896 = weight(_text_:2f in 4031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24230896 = score(doc=4031,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.26131085 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030822188 = queryNorm
        0.92728245 = fieldWeight in 4031, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4031)
    0.24230896 = weight(_text_:2f in 4031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24230896 = score(doc=4031,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.26131085 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030822188 = queryNorm
        0.92728245 = fieldWeight in 4031, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4031)
    0.24230896 = weight(_text_:2f in 4031) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.24230896 = score(doc=4031,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.26131085 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.030822188 = queryNorm
        0.92728245 = fieldWeight in 4031, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4031)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)
    Footnote
    DOI: 10.24894/HWPh.5033. Vgl. unter: https://www.schwabeonline.ch/schwabe-xaveropp/elibrary/start.xav#__elibrary__%2F%2F*%5B%40attr_id%3D%27verw.allgemeinesbesonderes%27%5D__1515856414979.
  2. Treude, L.: ¬Das Problem der Konzeptdefinition in der Wissensorganisation : über einen missglückten Versuch der Klärung (2013) 0.01 
    0.005155518 = product of:
  0.020622073 = sum of:
    0.012270111 = product of:
      0.03681033 = sum of:
        0.03681033 = weight(_text_:problem in 3060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03681033 = score(doc=3060,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13082431 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 3060, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3060)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.008351962 = product of:
      0.025055885 = sum of:
        0.025055885 = weight(_text_:22 in 3060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025055885 = score(doc=3060,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10793405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3060, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3060)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Source
    LIBREAS: Library ideas. no.22, 2013, S.xx-xx
  3. Jouis, C.: Logic of relationships (2002) 0.00 
    0.004296265 = product of:
  0.01718506 = sum of:
    0.010225092 = product of:
      0.030675275 = sum of:
        0.030675275 = weight(_text_:problem in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030675275 = score(doc=1204,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13082431 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.23447686 = fieldWeight in 1204, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1204)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    0.0069599687 = product of:
      0.020879906 = sum of:
        0.020879906 = weight(_text_:22 in 1204) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020879906 = score(doc=1204,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10793405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1204, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1204)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)
    Abstract
    A main goal of recent studies in semantics is to integrate into conceptual structures the models of representation used in linguistics, logic, and/or artificial intelligence. A fundamental problem resides in the need to structure knowledge and then to check the validity of constructed representations. We propose associating logical properties with relationships by introducing the relationships into a typed and functional system of specifcations. This makes it possible to compare conceptual representations against the relationships established between the concepts. The mandatory condition to validate such a conceptual representation is consistency. The semantic system proposed is based an a structured set of semantic primitives-types, relations, and properties-based an a global model of language processing, Applicative and Cognitive Grammar (ACG) (Desc16s, 1990), and an extension of this model to terminology (Jouis & Mustafa 1995, 1996, 1997). The ACG postulates three levels of representation of languages, including a cognitive level. At this level, the meanings of lexical predicates are represented by semantic cognitive schemes. From this perspective, we propose a set of semantic concepts, which defines an organized system of meanings. Relations are part of a specification network based an a general terminological scheure (i.e., a coherent system of meanings of relations). In such a system, a specific relation may be characterized as to its: (1) functional type (the semantic type of arguments of the relation); (2) algebraic properties (reflexivity, symmetry, transitivity, etc.); and (3) combinatorial relations with other entities in the same context (for instance, the part of the text where a concept is defined).
    Date
    1.12.2002 11:12:22
  4. Patzak, M.: Begriffsklärung als ein metatheoretisches Problem (1996) 0.00 
    0.003578782 = product of:
  0.028630257 = sum of:
    0.028630257 = product of:
      0.08589077 = sum of:
        0.08589077 = weight(_text_:problem in 3932) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08589077 = score(doc=3932,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13082431 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.6565352 = fieldWeight in 3932, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3932)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
  5. Marradi, A.: ¬The concept of concept : concepts and terms (2012) 0.00 
    0.0034957787 = product of:
  0.02796623 = sum of:
    0.02796623 = product of:
      0.041949343 = sum of:
        0.021069437 = weight(_text_:29 in 33) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021069437 = score(doc=33,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.108422816 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 33, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=33)
        0.020879906 = weight(_text_:22 in 33) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020879906 = score(doc=33,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10793405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 33, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=33)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    22. 1.2012 13:11:25
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 39(2012) no.1, S.29-54
  6. Eckes, T.: Wissenschaftliche Begriffsbildung und das Problem der induktiven Ambiguität (1996) 0.00 
    0.0030675277 = product of:
  0.024540221 = sum of:
    0.024540221 = product of:
      0.07362066 = sum of:
        0.07362066 = weight(_text_:problem in 3920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07362066 = score(doc=3920,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13082431 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.5627445 = fieldWeight in 3920, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3920)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
  7. Cabré, M.T.: Do we need an autonomous theory of terms? (1999) 0.00 
    0.0028092582 = product of:
  0.022474065 = sum of:
    0.022474065 = product of:
      0.067422196 = sum of:
        0.067422196 = weight(_text_:29 in 6289) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.067422196 = score(doc=6289,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.108422816 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.6218451 = fieldWeight in 6289, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=6289)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    5. 8.2001 13:29:43
  8. Kageura, K.: Theories of terminology : a quest for a framework for the study of term formation (1999) 0.00 
    0.0024581011 = product of:
  0.01966481 = sum of:
    0.01966481 = product of:
      0.058994424 = sum of:
        0.058994424 = weight(_text_:29 in 6290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058994424 = score(doc=6290,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.108422816 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 6290, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6290)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    5. 8.2001 13:29:54
  9. Dahlberg, I.: ¬Die gegenstandsbezogene, analytische Begriffstheorie und ihre Definitionsarten (1987) 0.00 
    0.002435989 = product of:
  0.019487912 = sum of:
    0.019487912 = product of:
      0.058463734 = sum of:
        0.058463734 = weight(_text_:22 in 880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.058463734 = score(doc=880,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10793405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 880, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=880)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Pages
    S.9-22
  10. Grandt, J.: Vom Gebrauch der Worte (2017) 0.00 
    0.0021069439 = product of:
  0.01685555 = sum of:
    0.01685555 = product of:
      0.05056665 = sum of:
        0.05056665 = weight(_text_:29 in 3258) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05056665 = score(doc=3258,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.108422816 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.46638384 = fieldWeight in 3258, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3258)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    28. 2.2017 13:29:03
  11. Wüster, E.: Begriffs- und Themaklassifikation : Unterschiede in ihrem Wesen und in ihrer Anwendung (1971) 0.00 
    0.0020879905 = product of:
  0.016703924 = sum of:
    0.016703924 = product of:
      0.05011177 = sum of:
        0.05011177 = weight(_text_:22 in 3904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05011177 = score(doc=3904,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10793405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3904, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3904)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Source
    Nachrichten für Dokumentation. 22(1971) H.3, S.98-104 (T.1); H.4, S.143-150 (T.2)
  12. Garcia Marco, F.J.; Esteban Navarro, M.A.: On some contributions of the cognitive sciences and epistemology to a theory of classification (1993) 0.00 
    0.0015337638 = product of:
  0.012270111 = sum of:
    0.012270111 = product of:
      0.03681033 = sum of:
        0.03681033 = weight(_text_:problem in 5876) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03681033 = score(doc=5876,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13082431 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 5876, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5876)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    Intended is first of all a preliminary review of the implications that the new approaches to the theory of classification, mainly from cognitive psychology and epistemology may have for information work and research. As a secondary topic the scientific relations existing among information science, epistemology and the cognitive sciences are discussed. Classification is seen as a central activity in all daily and scientific activities, and, of course, of knowledge organization in information services. There is a mutual implication between classification and conceptualization, as the former moves in a natural way to the latter and the best result elaborated for classification is the concept. Research in concept theory is a need for a theory of classification. In this direction it is of outstanding importance to integrate the achievements of 'natural concept formation theory' (NCFT) as an alternative approach to conceptualization different from the traditional one of logicians and problem solving researchers. In conclusion both approaches are seen as being complementary: the NCFT approach being closer to the user and the logical one being more suitable for experts, including 'expert systems'
  13. Khoo, C.; Myaeng, S.H.: Identifying semantic relations in text for information retrieval and information extraction (2002) 0.00 
    0.0015337638 = product of:
  0.012270111 = sum of:
    0.012270111 = product of:
      0.03681033 = sum of:
        0.03681033 = weight(_text_:problem in 1197) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03681033 = score(doc=1197,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13082431 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 1197, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1197)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    Automatic identification of semantic relations in text is a difficult problem, but is important for many applications. It has been used for relation matching in information retrieval to retrieve documents that contain not only the concepts but also the relations between concepts specified in the user's query. It is an integral part of information extraction-extracting from natural language text, facts or pieces of information related to a particular event or topic. Other potential applications are in the construction of relational thesauri (semantic networks of related concepts) and other kinds of knowledge bases, and in natural language processing applications such as machine translation and computer comprehension of text. This chapter examines the main methods used for identifying semantic relations automatically and their application in information retrieval and information extraction.
  14. Hovy, E.: Comparing sets of semantic relations in ontologies (2002) 0.00 
    0.0015337638 = product of:
  0.012270111 = sum of:
    0.012270111 = product of:
      0.03681033 = sum of:
        0.03681033 = weight(_text_:problem in 2178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03681033 = score(doc=2178,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13082431 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 2178, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2178)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    A set of semantic relations is created every time a domain modeler wants to solve some complex problem computationally. These relations are usually organized into ontologies. But three is little standardization of ontologies today, and almost no discussion an ways of comparing relations, of determining a general approach to creating relations, or of modeling in general. This chapter outlines an approach to establishing a general methodology for comparing and justifying sets of relations (and ontologies in general). It first provides several dozen characteristics of ontologies, organized into three taxonomies of increasingly detailed features, by which many essential characteristics of ontologies can be described. These features enable one to compare ontologies at a general level, without studying every concept they contain. But sometimes it is necessary to make detailed comparisons of content. The chapter then illustrates one method for determining salient points for comparison, using algorithms that semi-automatically identify similarities and differences between ontologies.
  15. Stock, W.: Begriffe und semantische Relationen in der Wissensrepräsentation (2009) 0.00 
    0.0015337638 = product of:
  0.012270111 = sum of:
    0.012270111 = product of:
      0.03681033 = sum of:
        0.03681033 = weight(_text_:problem in 3218) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03681033 = score(doc=3218,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13082431 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.28137225 = fieldWeight in 3218, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3218)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    Begriffsorientiertes Information Retrieval bedarf einer informationswissenschaftlichen Theorie der Begriffe sowie der semantischen Relationen. Ein Begriff wird durch seine Intension und Extension sowie durch Definitionen bestimmt. Dem Problem der Vagheit begegnen wir durch die Einführung von Prototypen. Wichtige Definitionsarten sind die Begriffserklärung (nach Aristoteles) und die Definition über Familienähnlichkeiten (im Sinne Wittgensteins). Wir modellieren Begriffe als Frames (in der Version von Barsalou). Die zentrale paradigmatische Relation in Wissensordnungen ist die Hierarchie, die in verschiedene Arten zu gliedern ist: Hyponymie zerfällt in die Taxonomie und die einfache Hyponymie, Meronymie in eine ganze Reihe unterschiedlicher Teil-Ganzes-Beziehungen. Wichtig für praktische Anwendungen ist die Transitivität der jeweiligen Relation. Eine unspezifische Assoziationsrelation ist bei den angepeilten Anwendungen wenig hilfreich und wird durch ein Bündel von generalisierbaren und fachspezifischen Relationen ersetzt. Unser Ansatz fundiert neue Optionen der Anwendung von Wissensordnungen in der Informationspraxis neben ihrem "klassischen" Einsatz beim Information Retrieval: Erweiterung von Suchanfragen (Anwendung der semantischen Nähe), automatisches Schlussfolgern (Anwendung der terminologischen Logik in Vorbereitung eines semantischen Web) und automatische Berechnungen (bei Funktionalbegriffen mit numerischen Wertangaben).
  16. Gerstenkorn, A.: Informationsbezug zwischen Gemein- und Fachsprache : Zum gemein- und fachsprachlichen Wort "Tal" (2006) 0.00 
    0.0014046291 = product of:
  0.011237033 = sum of:
    0.011237033 = product of:
      0.033711098 = sum of:
        0.033711098 = weight(_text_:29 in 6013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033711098 = score(doc=6013,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.108422816 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 6013, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6013)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    20. 8.2006 16:29:27
  17. Dahlberg, I.: Begriffsarbeit in der Wissensorganisation (2010) 0.00 
    0.0013919937 = product of:
  0.01113595 = sum of:
    0.01113595 = product of:
      0.03340785 = sum of:
        0.03340785 = weight(_text_:22 in 3726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03340785 = score(doc=3726,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10793405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3726, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3726)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Source
    Wissensspeicher in digitalen Räumen: Nachhaltigkeit - Verfügbarkeit - semantische Interoperabilität. Proceedings der 11. Tagung der Deutschen Sektion der Internationalen Gesellschaft für Wissensorganisation, Konstanz, 20. bis 22. Februar 2008. Hrsg.: J. Sieglerschmidt u. H.P.Ohly
  18. Storms, G.; VanMechelen, I.; DeBoeck, P.: Structural-analysis of the intension and extension of semantic concepts (1994) 0.00 
    0.0012179945 = product of:
  0.009743956 = sum of:
    0.009743956 = product of:
      0.029231867 = sum of:
        0.029231867 = weight(_text_:22 in 2574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029231867 = score(doc=2574,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10793405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2574, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2574)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Date
    22. 7.2000 19:17:40
  19. Bauer, G.: ¬Die vielseitigen Anwendungsmöglichkeiten des Kategorienprinzips bei der Wissensorganisation (2006) 0.00 
    0.0012179945 = product of:
  0.009743956 = sum of:
    0.009743956 = product of:
      0.029231867 = sum of:
        0.029231867 = weight(_text_:22 in 5710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029231867 = score(doc=5710,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10793405 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5710, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5710)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Pages
    S.22-33
  20. Onofri, A.: Concepts in context (2013) 0.00 
    8.946955E-4 = product of:
  0.007157564 = sum of:
    0.007157564 = product of:
      0.021472692 = sum of:
        0.021472692 = weight(_text_:problem in 1077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021472692 = score(doc=1077,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13082431 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.030822188 = queryNorm
            0.1641338 = fieldWeight in 1077, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.244485 = idf(docFreq=1723, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1077)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)
    Abstract
    My thesis discusses two related problems that have taken center stage in the recent literature on concepts: 1) What are the individuation conditions of concepts? Under what conditions is a concept Cv(1) the same concept as a concept Cv(2)? 2) What are the possession conditions of concepts? What conditions must be satisfied for a thinker to have a concept C? The thesis defends a novel account of concepts, which I call "pluralist-contextualist": 1) Pluralism: Different concepts have different kinds of individuation and possession conditions: some concepts are individuated more "coarsely", have less demanding possession conditions and are widely shared, while other concepts are individuated more "finely" and not shared. 2) Contextualism: When a speaker ascribes a propositional attitude to a subject S, or uses his ascription to explain/predict S's behavior, the speaker's intentions in the relevant context determine the correct individuation conditions for the concepts involved in his report. In chapters 1-3 I defend a contextualist, non-Millian theory of propositional attitude ascriptions. Then, I show how contextualism can be used to offer a novel perspective on the problem of concept individuation/possession. More specifically, I employ contextualism to provide a new, more effective argument for Fodor's "publicity principle": if contextualism is true, then certain specific concepts must be shared in order for interpersonally applicable psychological generalizations to be possible. In chapters 4-5 I raise a tension between publicity and another widely endorsed principle, the "Fregean constraint" (FC): subjects who are unaware of certain identity facts and find themselves in so-called "Frege cases" must have distinct concepts for the relevant object x. For instance: the ancient astronomers had distinct concepts (HESPERUS/PHOSPHORUS) for the same object (the planet Venus). First, I examine some leading theories of concepts and argue that they cannot meet both of our constraints at the same time. Then, I offer principled reasons to think that no theory can satisfy (FC) while also respecting publicity. (FC) appears to require a form of holism, on which a concept is individuated by its global inferential role in a subject S and can thus only be shared by someone who has exactly the same inferential dispositions as S. This explains the tension between publicity and (FC), since holism is clearly incompatible with concept shareability. To solve the tension, I suggest adopting my pluralist-contextualist proposal: concepts involved in Frege cases are holistically individuated and not public, while other concepts are more coarsely individuated and widely shared; given this "plurality" of concepts, we will then need contextual factors (speakers' intentions) to "select" the specific concepts to be employed in our intentional generalizations in the relevant contexts. In chapter 6 I develop the view further by contrasting it with some rival accounts. First, I examine a very different kind of pluralism about concepts, which has been recently defended by Daniel Weiskopf, and argue that it is insufficiently radical. Then, I consider the inferentialist accounts defended by authors like Peacocke, Rey and Jackson. Such views, I argue, are committed to an implausible picture of reference determination, on which our inferential dispositions fix the reference of our concepts: this leads to wrong predictions in all those cases of scientific disagreement where two parties have very different inferential dispositions and yet seem to refer to the same natural kind.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • d 14
  • e 10
  • m 2

Types

  • a 22
  • el 3
  • m 2
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications