Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorGiromi, Joséspa
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-01 00:00:00
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-04T14:54:57Z
dc.date.available2020-01-01 00:00:00
dc.date.available2021-02-04T14:54:57Z
dc.date.issued2020-01-01
dc.identifier.issn0124-6127
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.17151/difil.2020.21.36.6
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.ucaldas.edu.co/handle/ucaldas/15465
dc.description.abstractJohn Searle ha defendido un enfoque intencionalista de lo social, a saber, la idea de que la realidad social es creada y mantenida por ciertos estados mentalesy actos de habla. En este trabajo, en primer lugar, presentamos una versión detallada de los argumentos fundacionales de Searle, basada en la conexión entrereconocimiento colectivo y lenguaje. En segundo lugar, ofrecemos una crítica de estos argumentos, sugiriendo que ellos mismos nos llevan a admitir que losfundamentos de la realidad social son más prácticos que representacionales.spa
dc.description.abstractJohn Searle has advocated an intentionalist approach to the social, namely the idea that social reality is created and maintained by certain mental states and speech acts. In this work, we first present a detailed version of Searle’s intentionalist founding arguments based on the connection between collective recognition and language. In the second place, we offer a critique of these arguments, suggesting that they lead us to admit that the foundationsof social reality are more practical than representational.eng
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfspa
dc.language.isospaspa
dc.publisherUniversidad de Caldasspa
dc.rightsDerechos de autor 2020 Discusiones Filosóficasspa
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/spa
dc.sourcehttps://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/discusionesfilosoficas/article/view/2535spa
dc.subjectSocial ontologyeng
dc.subjectnormativityeng
dc.subjectJohn Searleeng
dc.subjectphilosophy of mindeng
dc.subjectpragmatismeng
dc.subjectOntología socialspa
dc.subjectnormatividadspa
dc.subjectJohn Searlespa
dc.subjectfilosofía de la mentespa
dc.subjectpragmatismospa
dc.titleLa impotencia de las representaciones: una crítica a la ontología social de John Searlespa
dc.typeSección Artículosspa
dc.typeArtículo de revistaspa
dc.typeJournal Articleeng
dc.identifier.doi10.17151/difil.2020.21.36.6
dc.identifier.eissn2462-9596
dc.relation.citationendpage104
dc.relation.citationissue36spa
dc.relation.citationstartpage79
dc.relation.citationvolume21spa
dc.relation.ispartofjournalDiscusiones Filosóficasspa
dc.relation.referencesBratman, Michael. “Shared Intention”. Ethics. Oct. 104 (1). 1993: 97-113. Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesBrandom, Robert. “A hegelian model of legal concept determination: the normative fine structure of the judge’s chain novel”. Hubbs, Graham y Lind, Douglas (Eds.) Pragmatism, law and language. New York: Routledge. 2014. Print.spa
dc.relation.references______. “Some pragmatist themes in Hegel’s idealism”. Tales of the mighty dead (pp. 210-234). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 2002. Print.spa
dc.relation.references______. Making it explicit: reasoning, representing and discursive commitment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1994. Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesChant, Sara, Hindriks, Frank & Preyer, Gerhard. (eds.) From individual to collective Intentionality: New Essays, Nueva York: Oxford University Press. (2014). Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesGilbert, Margaret. “Acting together”. Joint commitment: How we make the social world. Nueva York: Oxford University Press. (2014). Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesHornsby, Jennifer. (1997). “Collectives and intentionality”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. Jun. 57 (2). 1997: pp. 429-434. Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesKukla, Rebecca & Lance, Mark. Yo and Lo: The pragmatic topography of the space of reasons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 2009. Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesLawson, Tony. “Comparing conceptions of social ontology: emergent social entities and/or institutional facts?” Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. Dec. 46 (4). 2016: 359-399. Print.spa
dc.relation.references______. “A conception of social ontology”. Pratten, Stephen (Ed.). Social ontology and modern economics. New York: Routledge. 2015. Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesMalinowski, Bronislaw. Crimen y costumbre en la sociedad salvaje. Barcelona: Planeta-De Agostini. 1985. Impreso.spa
dc.relation.referencesRouse, Joseph. “Social practices and normativity”. Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Mar. 37 (1). 2007: pp.1-11. Print.spa
dc.relation.references______. How scientific practices matter: reclaiming philosophical naturalism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2002. Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesSánchez Cuenca, Ignacio. “A behavioural critique of Searle’s theory of institutions”. Tsohatzidis, S. (Ed.) Intentional acts and institutional facts: essays on John Searle’s social ontology. Dordrecht: Springer. 2007. Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesSearle, John, Ferraris, Maurizio & Condello, Angela. Money, social ontology and law. Nueva York: Routledge. 2019. Print.spa
dc.relation.references______. Making the social world: the structure of human civilization. Nueva York: Oxford University Press. 2010. Print.spa
dc.relation.references______. “Responses to critics of The Construction of Social Reality”. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. Jun. 57(2). 1997: pp. 449-458. Print.spa
dc.relation.references______. The construction of social reality. Nueva York: The Free Press. 1995. Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesSmith, Barry. “John Searle: From speech acts to social reality”. Smith, B. (ed.) John Searle. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (2003) Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesVicari, Giuseppe. “Collective intentionality, language and normativity: a problem and a possible solution for the analysis of cooperation”. Epkeina. 5 (1). 2015: 183-207.spa
dc.relation.referencesWilson, Robert. “Social reality and institutional facts”. Tsohatzidis, S. (Ed.) Intentional acts and institutional facts: essays on John Searle’s social ontology. Dordrecht: Springer. 2007. Print.spa
dc.relation.referencesZimmermann, Stephan. “Is society built on collective intentions? A response to John Searle”. Rivista di estetica. 57. 2014: pp. 121-141. Print.spa
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessspa
dc.title.translatedThe impotence of representations: a criticism of John Searle's social ontologyeng
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501spa
dc.type.contentTextspa
dc.type.driverinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlespa
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionspa
dc.relation.citationeditionNúm. 36 , Año 2020 : Enero - Juniospa
dc.relation.bitstreamhttps://revistasojs.ucaldas.edu.co/index.php/discusionesfilosoficas/article/download/2535/2345
dc.type.coarversionhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85spa
dc.rights.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2spa


Ficheros en el ítem

FicherosTamañoFormatoVer
discusionesfilosoficas-2535.pdf314.6Kbapplication/pdfVer/

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

Derechos de autor 2020 Discusiones Filosóficas
Excepto si se señala otra cosa, la licencia del ítem se describe como Derechos de autor 2020 Discusiones Filosóficas