Annotation:Text:Distinguishing the Observer: An Attempt at Interpreting Maturana/C83hkvs353

Annotation of	Text:Distinguishing_the_Observer:_An_Attempt_at_Interpreting_Maturana
Annotation Comment
Last Modification Date	2019-09-27T19:21:50.362Z
Last Modification User	User:Sarah Oberbichler
Annotation Metadata	^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"C83hkvs353","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ27Ӻ","startOffset":0,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ28Ӻ","endOffset":341°Ӻ,"quote":"In Maturana’s view of the world, one can request neither external ontological foundations nor an “absolute” beginning. Both requests are not only meaningless but also superfluous in such a view. “Foundation” in the ontological sense presupposes that one considers access to an observer-independent world possible. Maturana denies that possibility no less decidedly than does Roth; and the “beginning” that Roth misses, would require an obligatory starting point, i.e. an “unconditional principle” needing no justification, on which the theoretical edifice could be erected by pure logic. But Maturana’s theory explicitly excludes such a linear construction by its deliberately circular development of the key concepts.\nThe misunderstanding may have originated from the fact that Maturana, like the rest of us, is obliged to use a language in his expositions that has been shaped and polished by more than two thousand years of naive realism and forces him to use the word “to be” which, in all its grammatical forms, implies the assumption of an ontic reality.","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery321077157362950965542":^°°,^"jQuery321077157362950965542":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","order":"mw-content-text","category":"Innovationsdiskurs2","data_creacio":1569604909982°

Innovationstyp	Missverständnisse aufzeigen