Prace komisji nauk.pdf - Instytut Filologii Angielskiej Uniwersytetu ...
Prace komisji nauk.pdf - Instytut Filologii Angielskiej Uniwersytetu ... Prace komisji nauk.pdf - Instytut Filologii Angielskiej Uniwersytetu ...
Peirce considers inferential any cognitive activity whatever, not only conscious abstract thought; he also includes perceptual knowledge and subconscious cognitive activity. For instance in subconscious mental activities visual representations play an immediate role. 57 Many commentators always criticized the Peircian ambiguity in treating abduction in the same time as inference and perception. It is important to clarify this problem, because perception and imagery are kinds of that model-based cognition which we are exploiting to explain abduction: in (Magnani 2006) I conclude we can render consistent the two views, beyond Peirce, but perhaps also within the Peircian texts, taking advantage of the concept of multimodal abduction, which depicts hybrid aspects of abductive reasoning (Magnani 2006). 6. Constructing meaning through Mimetic and creative External Objects 6.1. Constructing Meaning through Manipulative Abduction Manipulative abduction occurs when many external things, usually inert from the semiotic point of view, can be transformed into what I have called “epistemic mediators” (Magnani 2001a) that give rise - for instance in the case of scientific reasoning - to new signs, new chances for interpretants, and new interpretations. We can cognitively account for the process of disembodiment of mind we have seen in the perspective of paleoanthropology taking advantage of the concept pf manipulative abduction. It happens when we are thinking through doing and not only, in a pragmatic sense, about doing. It happens, for instance, when we are creating geometry constructing and manipulating an external, suitably realized, 57 Cf. Queiroz and Merrell, 2005. 254
icon like a triangle looking for new meaningful features of it, like in the case given by Kant in the “Transcendental Doctrine of Method” (cf. Magnani 2001b; cf. also the following subsection). It refers to an extra-theoretical behavior that aims at creating communicable accounts of new experiences to integrate them into previously existing systems of experimental and linguistic (semantic) practices. Gooding (1990) refers to this kind of concrete manipulative reasoning when he illustrates the role in science of the so-called “construals” that embody tacit inferences in procedures that are often apparatus and machine based. The embodiment is of course an expert manipulation of meaningful semiotic objects in a highly constrained experimental environment, and is directed by abductive movements that imply the strategic application of old and new templates of behavior mainly connected with extra-rational components, for instance emotional, esthetical, ethical, and economic. The hypothetical character of construals is clear: they can be developed to examine or discard further chances, they are provisional creative organization of experience and some of them become in their turn hypothetical interpretations of experience, that is more theory-oriented, their reference/meaning is gradually stabilized in terms of established observational practices. Step by step the new interpretation - that at the beginning is completely “practice-laden” - relates to more “theoretical” modes of understanding (narrative, visual, diagrammatic, symbolic, conceptual, simulative), closer to the constructive effects of theoretical abduction. When the reference/meaning is stabilized the effects of incommensurability with other established observations can become evident. But it is just the construal of certain phenomena that can be shared by the sustainers of rival theories. Gooding (1990) shows how Davy and Faraday could see the same attractive and repulsive actions at work in the phenomena they respectively produced; their discourse and practice as to the role of their construals of 255
- Page 204 and 205: chociaŜ w pewnym stopniu scharakte
- Page 206 and 207: UŜycie przywołanych w powyŜszych
- Page 208 and 209: Odnośniki do bliskiej historii Ten
- Page 210 and 211: przeanalizował transmisję tego sa
- Page 212 and 213: mecze z dwóch amerykańskich lig (
- Page 214 and 215: Mecz 2 Drugie analizowane spotkanie
- Page 216 and 217: Dlatego teŜ w analizie tego spotka
- Page 218 and 219: W powyŜszych informacji wynika, Ŝ
- Page 220 and 221: Komentatorzy nie chcą juŜ poświ
- Page 222 and 223: former include e.g. rhythm or metre
- Page 224 and 225: frame of musical limitations must b
- Page 226 and 227: This, again, proves that there are
- Page 228 and 229: text. The case of altering versions
- Page 230 and 231: target text becomes useless, even i
- Page 232 and 233: Raffel, Burton (1998) The Art of Tr
- Page 234 and 235: externalized semiotic materiality a
- Page 236 and 237: 2) abduction considered as inferenc
- Page 238 and 239: or symbolic behavior. If we conside
- Page 240 and 241: separated cognitive domain, that of
- Page 242 and 243: A wonderful example of meaning crea
- Page 244 and 245: 4.1. External and Internal Represen
- Page 246 and 247: In the following section I will ill
- Page 248 and 249: Recognizing in a series of material
- Page 250 and 251: ecome signs when we think and inter
- Page 252 and 253: its face is also an interpretant. P
- Page 256 and 257: phenomena clearly demonstrate they
- Page 258 and 259: (Piaget, 1974), or when we are in p
- Page 260 and 261: If a manipulative action performed
- Page 262 and 263: environment, where mind has objecti
- Page 264 and 265: thoughts, proves that man is a sign
- Page 266 and 267: Brent, J. (2000) “A Brief Introdu
- Page 268 and 269: Kant, I., ([1770] 1968) Inaugural D
- Page 270 and 271: Norman, D.A. (1993) Things that Mak
- Page 272 and 273: 272
- Page 274 and 275: W największym skrócie istotę nie
- Page 276 and 277: edukcja wyrazu prostego polegająca
- Page 278 and 279: [v]. W dawniejszej polszczyźnie is
- Page 280 and 281: tego rodzaju nieregularnemu rozwojo
- Page 282 and 283: Wreszcie z pewnej gazety holendersk
- Page 284 and 285: innych wierzchowców. Chodzi o to,
- Page 286 and 287: której niektórzy Australijczycy s
- Page 288 and 289: Jest kilkanaście 1-sylabowych wyra
- Page 290 and 291: mianowicie it, przy czym it jest u
- Page 292 and 293: Moim zdaniem wymowa ta powstała na
- Page 294 and 295: Literatura 1 F. Diez, Altromanische
- Page 296 and 297: the Younger Futhark 62 , czy teŜ S
- Page 298 and 299: zaznaczyć, iŜ poszczególne inskr
- Page 300 and 301: sytuacji komunikacyjnej, w której
- Page 302 and 303: powszechnym szacunkiem, a monument
Peirce considers inferential any cognitive activity whatever, not only conscious<br />
abstract thought; he also includes perceptual knowledge and subconscious<br />
cognitive activity. For instance in subconscious mental activities visual<br />
representations play an immediate role. 57<br />
Many commentators always criticized the Peircian ambiguity in treating<br />
abduction in the same time as inference and perception. It is important to clarify<br />
this problem, because perception and imagery are kinds of that model-based<br />
cognition which we are exploiting to explain abduction: in (Magnani 2006) I<br />
conclude we can render consistent the two views, beyond Peirce, but perhaps also<br />
within the Peircian texts, taking advantage of the concept of multimodal abduction,<br />
which depicts hybrid aspects of abductive reasoning (Magnani 2006).<br />
6. Constructing meaning through Mimetic and creative External Objects<br />
6.1. Constructing Meaning through Manipulative Abduction<br />
Manipulative abduction occurs when many external things, usually inert from the<br />
semiotic point of view, can be transformed into what I have called “epistemic<br />
mediators” (Magnani 2001a) that give rise - for instance in the case of scientific<br />
reasoning - to new signs, new chances for interpretants, and new interpretations.<br />
We can cognitively account for the process of disembodiment of mind we<br />
have seen in the perspective of paleoanthropology taking advantage of the concept<br />
pf manipulative abduction. It happens when we are thinking through doing and not<br />
only, in a pragmatic sense, about doing. It happens, for instance, when we are<br />
creating geometry constructing and manipulating an external, suitably realized,<br />
57 Cf. Queiroz and Merrell, 2005.<br />
254