Item Type |
Article |
ID |
|
Preview |
Image |
|
Caption |
|
|
Full text |
AN00150430-00000086-0027.pdf
Type |
:application/pdf |
Download
|
Size |
:1.5 MB
|
Last updated |
:Sep 30, 2010 |
Downloads |
: 953 |
Total downloads since Sep 30, 2010 : 953
|
|
Release Date |
|
Title |
Title |
バークリの「抽象」の理論
|
Kana |
バークリ ノ 「チュウショウ」 ノ リロン
|
Romanization |
Bakuri no "chusho" no riron
|
|
Other Title |
Title |
Berkeley on "abstraction"
|
Kana |
|
Romanization |
|
|
Creator |
Name |
三浦, 雅弘
|
Kana |
ミウラ, マサヒロ
|
Romanization |
Miura, Masahiro
|
Affiliation |
慶應義塾大学大学院文学研究科博士課程
|
Affiliation (Translated) |
|
Role |
|
Link |
|
|
Edition |
|
Place |
|
Publisher |
Name |
三田哲學會
|
Kana |
ミタ テツガクカイ
|
Romanization |
Mita tetsugakukai
|
|
Date |
Issued (from:yyyy) |
1988
|
Issued (to:yyyy) |
|
Created (yyyy-mm-dd) |
|
Updated (yyyy-mm-dd) |
|
Captured (yyyy-mm-dd) |
|
|
Physical description |
|
Source Title |
Name |
哲學
|
Name (Translated) |
|
Volume |
|
Issue |
86
|
Year |
1988
|
Month |
6
|
Start page |
27
|
End page |
58
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
DOI |
|
URI |
|
JaLCDOI |
|
NII Article ID |
|
Ichushi ID |
|
Other ID |
|
Doctoral dissertation |
Dissertation Number |
|
Date of granted |
|
Degree name |
|
Degree grantor |
|
|
Abstract |
Generally we regard both Locke and Berkeley as "nominalists". But correctly speaking, they should be called "nominalistic realists", because they restrict what exists to what is particular, and yet admit that predications extending beyond some original paradigm specimens may be valid. But Berkeley blames Locke bitterly for "abstract or general ideas", which are, according to Locke, the bonds between particular things that exist and the names they are to be ranked under. His attack on Locke results from two theoretical bases, one of which is his ontology and the other is his theory of "signification". On the latter we should pay attention to his pragmatic point of view. Though Berkeley rejects "abstract ideas" in the Lockean sense, he doesn't necessarily deny our ability to abstract. I suppose the abstraction level he rejects is not "abstraction" but "generalization" to be exact. And, with Berkeley, the epistemological condition that precedes the ability to abstract within the limits of his permission and "general ideas" in the Berkeleian sense, is our ability to perceive "likeness" between particulars, in my opinion.
|
|
Table of contents |
1. 「抽象」と「一般化」
2. ロックにおける「抽象観念」
3. バークリの批判
4. バークリの提案とその解釈
(1) 言語と観念 : 「記号的表示」の理論
(2) バークリの語用論的アスペクト
(3) バークリ批判の検討
5. バークリにおける「抽象」
(1) 「抽象」能力の容認
(2) 容認の帰結
(3) 「抽象」の実相
6. バークリの「普遍論争」へのコミットメント
7. 回顧と展望
|
|
Keyword |
|
NDC |
|
Note |
|
Language |
|
Type of resource |
|
Genre |
|
Text version |
|
Related DOI |
|
Access conditions |
|
Last modified date |
|
Creation date |
|
Registerd by |
|
History |
|
Index |
|
Related to |
|