Difference between revisions of "Walk:SpracheWelten"
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
Im Vergleich fällt auf, dass manche Konzepte in der einen Sprache mit mehreren Begriffen beschrieben werden, während eine andere alle Aspokte in einem Wort zusammenfasst. | Im Vergleich fällt auf, dass manche Konzepte in der einen Sprache mit mehreren Begriffen beschrieben werden, während eine andere alle Aspokte in einem Wort zusammenfasst. | ||
Glasersfeld verwendet diese Begriffe und besonders die feinen Unterschiede zwischen Englisch, Deutsch und Italieneisch gerne auch in seiner Argumentation. | Glasersfeld verwendet diese Begriffe und besonders die feinen Unterschiede zwischen Englisch, Deutsch und Italieneisch gerne auch in seiner Argumentation. | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{#subobject: | ||
| + | |stationId=5 | ||
| + | |stationType=normal | ||
| + | |stationHeader=Re-presentations = Vorstellung oder Darstellung? | ||
| + | |stationText=Given that Maturana, at various places in his writings, makes it very clear that he considers unacceptable the concept that is usually linked with the word “representation”, it may surprise one at first that, in the passage quoted here, he bases a discrimination of conversations on “expectations”. In my analysis, to have an expectation means to represent to oneself something that one has not yet isolated by means of distinctions in the present flow of actual experience. The apparent contradiction disappears, however, if one considers that the English word “representation” is used to designate several different concepts, two among which are designated in German by the two words Darstellung and Vorstellung.[9] The first comes to the mind of English-speakers whenever there is no explicit indication that another is intended. This concept is close to the notion of “picture” and as such involves the replication, in a physical or formal way, of something else that is categorized as “original”. The second concept is close to the notion of “conceptual construct”, and the German word for it, Vorstellung, is central in the philosophies of Kant and Schopenhauer. Maturana’s aversion against the word “representation” springs from the fact that, like Kant and Schopenhauer, he excludes conceptual pictures or replications of an objective, ontic reality in the cognitive domain of organisms. In contrast, re- presentations in Piaget’s sense are repetitions or reconstructions of items that were distinguished in previous experience. As Maturana explained in the course of the discussions at the ASC Conference in October 1988, such representations are possible also in the autopoietic model. Maturana spoke there of re-living an experience, and from my perspective this coincides with the concept of representation as Vorstellung, without which there could be no reflection. From that angle, then, it becomes clear that, in the autopoietic organism also, “expectations” are nothing but re-presentations of experiences that are now projected into the direction of the not-yet-experienced. | ||
| + | |stationDocumentSourceTitle=Source: Distinguishing the Observer: An Attempt at Interpreting Maturana | ||
| + | |stationDocumentSourceURL=http://dbis-digivis.uibk.ac.at/mediawiki/index.php/Distinguishing_the_Observer:_An_Attempt_at_Interpreting_Maturana | ||
| + | |stationVideoURL= | ||
| + | |stationImageURL= | ||
| + | |stationConclusion=Aber nicht nur ein Vergleich verschiedener SPrachen erscheint ihm wichtig. Glasersfeld betrachtet auch Unterschiede in einer Sprache und nicht zuletzt, wie wir als Sprecherinnen und Sprecher mit diesen Unterschieden und Feinheiten umgehen. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Denn nich timmer nutzen wir dei Möglichkeiten, die uns unsere Sprachen zur Verfügung stellen. | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{#subobject:ConclusionStation | {{#subobject:ConclusionStation | ||
| − | |stationId= | + | |stationId=6 |
|stationType=conclusion | |stationType=conclusion | ||
|conclusionHeader= | |conclusionHeader= | ||
