Dissertation, Universite de Paris X (Paris-Nanterre) (France) (1970)

Authors
Steven James Bartlett
Willamette University
Abstract
This is Vol. I in French. Vol. II in English is available separately from this website. The principal objective of the work is to construct an analytically precise methodology which can serve to identify, eliminate, and avoid a certain widespread conceptual fault or misconstruction, called a "projective misconstruction" or "projection" by the author. It is argued that this variety of error in our thinking (i) infects a great number of our everyday, scientific, and philosophical concepts, claims, and theories, (ii) has largely been undetected, and (iii), when remedied, leads to a less controversial and more rigorous elucidation of the transcendental preconditions of human knowledge than has traditionally been possible. The dissertation identifies, perhaps for the first time, a projective variety of self-referential inconsistency, and proposes an innovative, self-reflexive approach to transcendental argument in a logical and phenomenological context. The strength of the approach lies, it is claimed, in the fact that a rejection of the approach is possible only on pain of self-referential inconsistency. The argument is developed in the following stages: A general introduction identifies the central theme of the work, defines the scope of applicability of the results reached, and sketches the direction of the studies that follow. The preliminary discussion culminates in a recognition of the need for a critique of impure reason. The body of the work is divided into two parts: Section I seeks to develop a methodology, on a purely formal basis, which is, on the one hand, capable of being used to study the transcendental foundations of the special sciences, including its own proper transcendental foundation. On the other hand, the methodology proposed is intended as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool for dealing with projective uses of concepts. The approach initiates an analysis of concepts from a perspective which views knowledge as coordination. Section I describes formal structures that possess the status of preconditions in such a coordinative account of knowledge. Special attention is given to the preconditions of identifying reference to logical particulars. The first section attempts, then, to provide a self-referential, transcendental methodology which is essentially revisionary in that it is motivated by a concern for conceptual error-elimination. Phenomenology, considered in its unique capacity as a self-referential, transcendental discipline, is of special relevance to the study. Section II accordingly examines a group of concepts which come into question in connection with the central theme of phenomenological constitution. The "de-projective methodology" developed in Section I is applied to these concepts that have a foundational importance in transcendental phenomenology. A translation is, in effect, proposed from the language of consciousness to a language in which preconditions of referring are investigated. The result achieved is the elimination of self-defeating, projective concepts from a rigorous, phenomenological study of the constitutive foundations of science. The dissertation was presented in a two volume, double-language format for the convenience of French and English researchers. Each volume contains an analytical index.
Keywords sui-reference  argumentation transcendentale  pathologie conceptuelle  concepts de nature projéctive  raisonnement de-projéctive  constitution phénoménologique  critique de la raison impure
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

How to Make Our Ideas Clear.Charles Peirce - 2016 - Revista Filosofía Uis 15 (2).
How to Make Our Ideas Clear.Charles S. Peirce - 2011 - In Robert B. Talisse & Scott F. Aikin (eds.), The Pragmatism Reader: From Peirce Through the Present. Princeton University Press. pp. 50-65.

View all 7 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Fenomenologia tego, co implikowane.Steven James Bartlett - 1974 - Roczniki Filozoficzne 22 (1):73.
Phenomenology of the Implicit.Steven Bartlett - 1975 - Dialectica 29 (2‐3):173-188.
Phenomenology and New Rhetoric.Steven James Bartlett - 1970/2014 - Willamette University Faculty Research Website.
Projective Spinor Geometry and Prespace.F. A. M. Frescura - 1988 - Foundations of Physics 18 (8):777-808.
Projective Prewellorderings Vs Projective Wellfounded Relations.Xianghui Shi - 2009 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 74 (2):579-596.
Self-Reference, Phenomenology, and Philosophy of Science.Steven James Bartlett - 1980 - Methodology and Science: Interdisciplinary Journal for the Empirical Study of the Foundations of Science and Their Methodology 13 (3):143-167.
Undecidable Theories of Lyndon Algebras.Vera Stebletsova & Yde Venema - 2001 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 66 (1):207-224.
Undecidable Theories of Lyndon Algebras.Vera Stebletsova & Yde Venema - 2001 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 66 (1):207-224.
Projective Uniformization Revisited.Kai Hauser & Ralf-Dieter Schindler - 2000 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 103 (1-3):109-153.
The Worldview of Phenomenology.Steven James Bartlett - 1969/2017 - Willamette University Faculty Research Website.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2017-06-07

Total views
75 ( #147,094 of 2,462,519 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
11 ( #65,051 of 2,462,519 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes