12 found
Sort by:
  1. Eugen Zeleňák (2013). Semantics of Historical Representation in Terms of Aspects. Journal of the Philosophy of History 7 (2):244-256.
    In his latest book, Frank Ankersmit proposes an original theory of historical representation. In this review I focus on what I take to be his most important semantic points with respect to representation, meaning, truth, and reference. First, I provide a short summary of the book. Second, I explore his semantics in terms of aspects and compare it with a different account inspired by the Fregean notion of mode of presentation. As my examination shows, Ankersmit’s analysis faces the problem of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Eugen Zeleňák (2013). Using Goodman to Explore Historical Representation. Journal of the Philosophy of History 7 (3):371-395.
    Several authors argue that historical works should be viewed as relatively complex and autonomous constructions that are of interest in their own right. In the paper I follow this general approach to history and provide an analysis of historical representation inspired mainly by Nelson Goodman’s observations about symbols. In Languages of Art, Goodman makes a number of interesting claims regarding pictorial representation, exemplification and expression, which could be employed to clarify certain semantic questions of history. He convincingly shows that there (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Eugen Zeleňák (2012). O paradoxe havranov, o novej záhade indukcie ao ich predstavení. Organon F 19 (4):523-542.
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Eugen Zeleňák (2011). Indirect Reference and the Creation of Distance in History. History and Theory 50 (4):68-80.
    ABSTRACTIn his discussion of David Hume and historical distance, Mark Salber Phillips points out that in the process of distance‐creation there is a distinction between something occurring “within the text” and “outside the text.” In this paper I draw on this distinction and introduce a semantic mechanism that allows a certain distance to be designed within a historical text. This mechanism is highlighted in a view of reference that sees it as indirect . According to the indirect reference view, meaning (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Eugen Zelenak (2011). On Sense, Reference, and Tone in History. Journal of the Philosophy of History 4 (3-4):354-374.
    This paper tries to show how the Fregean semantic framework, especially the notions of sense and tone, can be used to explain certain features of history. Following Michael Dummett's interpretation of Gottlob Frege's notion of meaning, it is possible to conceive of historical works as proposing particular modes of presentation of past events. In fact, alternative historical works about the same past events could be viewed as differing in what sense and tone they express. In this paper, I first outline (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Eugen Zelenak (2010). On Two Approaches to Narrative Explanations. Filozofia 65 (8):762-769.
    The paper deals with one of the central topics of the philosophy of history – the narrative. Two different views of narrative and consequently of narrative explanation are distinguished. According to the first position , reality itself does not have a narrative structure, but since we are familiar with the narrative form, we can explain events if we present them as a story of a particular kind. According to the second position , in order to explain, we need to capture (...)
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Ladislav Kvasz & Eugen Zeleňák (2009). A Problem for Popper's Fallibilism. In Zuzana Parusniková & R. S. Cohen (eds.), Rethinking Popper. Springer. 71--81.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Eugen Zelenak (2009). Historical Fact, Realism and Constructivism. Filozofia 64 (7):625-633.
    The aim of the paper is to discuss the account of the fact presented by Václav ?erník. First, the author outlines the views of the defenders of the naïve realism, constructivism , and critical realism in historiography. The leading proponents of narrativism hold, that what the historians construe is not single facts, but general narrative interpretations. The second part offers a critical analysis of some notions and distinctions introduced by ?erník in his theory of the social fact. The most questionable (...)
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Eugen Zeleñák (2009). Historický fakt, realizmus a konštruktivizmus. Filozofia 64 (7).
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Eugen Zeleňák (2009). On Explanatory Relata in Singular Causal Explanation. Theoria 75 (3):179-195.
    Explanation is usually taken to be a relation between certain entities. The aim of this paper is to discuss what entities are suitable as explanatory relata of singular causal explanations, i.e., explanations concerning singular causality relating particular events or other appropriate entities. I outline three different positions. The purely causal approach stipulates that the same entities that are related in the singular causal relation are also linked by the explanatory relation. This position, however, has a problem to distinguish between causation (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Eugen Zeleňák (2009). Two Approaches to Event Ontology. Organon F 16 (3):283-303.
    In the paper, I distinguish between the semantic and the “direct” approach to event ontology. The first approach, employed by D. Davidson, starts with logical analysis of natural language. This analysis uncovers quantification over the domain of events. Thus, we have ontological commitment to events and, at the same time, also a suggestion of how to view their nature. The second approach, used by J. Kim and D. Lewis, deals with events “directly”, i.e. not by analyzing language first. Events are (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Eugen Zeleňák (2006). On Pragmatic and Non-Pragmatic Concept of Explanation. Organon F 13 (3):334-348.
    This paper attempts to analyze in detail the difference between a pragmatic and non-pragmatic approach to explanation. Proponents of a pragmatic explanation analyze it by means of the concepts of context or audience. However, there could be various disguises of this type of approach. It is possible to include pragmatic concepts into the characterization of the item to be explained or the item that explains. On the other hand, pragmatic approach may focus on the specific relation between the item to (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation