Dialectica 57 (3):330–336 (2003)
In Languages of Art, Nelson Goodman presents a general theory of symbolic notation. However, I show that his theory could not adequately explain possible cases of natural language notational uses, and argue that this outcome undermines, not only Goodman’s own theory, but any broadly type versus token based account of notational structure. Given this failure, an alternative representational theory is proposed, in which different visual or perceptual aspects of a given physical inscription each represent a different letter, word, or other notational item. Such a view is strongly supported by the completely conventional relation between inscriptions and notation, as shown by encryption techniques etc.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Notationality and the Information Processing Mind.Vinod Goel - 1991 - Minds and Machines 1 (2):129-166.
Do Token-Token Identity Theories Show Why We Don't Need Reductionism?Nancy D. Cartwright - 1979 - Philosophical Studies 36 (July):85-90.
Polymorphic Type Checking for the Type Theory of the Principia Mathematica of Russell and Whitehead.M. Randall Holmes - unknown
Universal Grammar as a Theory of Notation.Humphrey P. Polanen Van Petel - 2006 - Axiomathes 16 (4):460-485.
Multiple Inheritance and Film Identity: A Reply to Dilworth.Aaron Smuts - 2003 - Contemporary Aesthetics 1:1-3.
The Philosophy of Nelson Goodman: Selected Essays.Catherine Z. Elgin (ed.) - 1997 - Garland.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads141 ( #32,975 of 2,158,104 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #89,427 of 2,158,104 )
How can I increase my downloads?