Abstract
Dialectics and Formalization. In an appendix to his article Can the concept of dialectic be made clear? (JGPS 27: 131–165) the author critically examined an attempt by D. Wandschneider of reconstructing Hegelian dialectical logic by displaying antinomic structures. The main steps of this reconstruction were formalized within the framework of second order predicate logic. In his reply (JGPS 27: 347–352) Wandschneider argues that formalization is the wrong way of interpreting and judging his reconstruction project on the ground that the understanding of predication is already presupposed by predicate logic and, therefore, cannot be formalized. In the present contribution it is shown that Wandschneider's criticism is based on a fundamentally mistaken conception of formalization and formal logic and that the problems posed by his project remain completely unresolved.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
LITERATUR
Hegel, G. W. F.: 1956, Berliner Schriften 1818–1831, hrsg. von J. Hoffmeister, Meiner Verlag, Hamburg.
Heidegger, M.: 1976, Wegmarken. Gesamtausgabe, Bd. 9, Klostermann, Frankfurt/M.
Puntel, L. B.: 1990, Grundlagen einer Theorie der Wahrheit, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin/New York.
Puntel, L. B.: 1996, „Läßt sich der Begriff der Dialektik klären?”, Journal for General Philosophy of Science. 27: 131–165.
Wandschneider, D.: 1996, „Eine auch sich selbst mißverstehende Kritik:über das Reflexionsdefizit formaler Explikationen”, Journal for General Philosophy of Science. 27: 347–352.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Puntel, L.B. Dialektik Und Formalisierung. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 28, 367–383 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008252906471
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008252906471