지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Semantics of paradox is a theory on the meaning of paradoxical expressions like “That is a nonsense!”, “It is absurd!”. As a working definition, ‘paradox’ is defined as a specific type of situation which causes people to respond to it with such utterances like above. The semantics of paradox will not look like a semantics of words, phrases, sentences, or compound sentences. It has to do with the aspects of situations which are of a higher level category than that of things, states, events, or simple conjunction of events.
To construct a theory of paradox, it is essential to find specific patterns in the situations which bring about the socalled paradoxical responses. These patterns which constitute the situations are the core that has paradoxical efficacy. The patterns I present are: Infinity, Totality, Self-reflexivity, Duplexity (manifested through Confusion through Representation or Taking-as), and the singular domain - the First Person-Singular-Present.
I discuss these patterns independently or in association with the philosophers’ treatments of their paradoxes. The ‘vagueness’ found in the talk on Sorites Paradox is repudiated. The philosophers felt it paradox not because it was vague but because they have seen the Law of Mathematical Induction violated. And the self-reflexivity found in the Liar’s Paradox is not the genuine cause of the paradox, but rather it is the confusion between the object language and the meta language.
Why do paradoxes occur? Is it because the world goes like that? Is it because we see, think and act in a specific way? I think the both are to be taken into consideration, and always at the same time. Why do we respond in such a way to the paradoxes? Well, first because of the feeling of total helplessness, or uncontrollability we feel when the world is vast and have infinity which our finite reason cannot measure or cope with. And when we see things broken or violated, the things that we keep preserving and want to preserve, and that preserve us: the laws or the principles, the dearest things, the norms, the conscious or unconscious practices, or habits. When they are broken or violated it is hard for us to tolerate the situation. So the paradoxes teach us what they are that we preserve and keep. They inform us how we conduct our behaviors, how we choose, and how we react. They raise us our understanding, knowledge, emotion or perception to higher levels when we have understood what paradoxes are and how paradoxes work upon us.
To construct a theory of paradox, it is essential to find specific patterns in the situations which bring about the socalled paradoxical responses. These patterns which constitute the situations are the core that has paradoxical efficacy. The patterns I present are: Infinity, Totality, Self-reflexivity, Duplexity (manifested through Confusion through Representation or Taking-as), and the singular domain - the First Person-Singular-Present.
I discuss these patterns independently or in association with the philosophers’ treatments of their paradoxes. The ‘vagueness’ found in the talk on Sorites Paradox is repudiated. The philosophers felt it paradox not because it was vague but because they have seen the Law of Mathematical Induction violated. And the self-reflexivity found in the Liar’s Paradox is not the genuine cause of the paradox, but rather it is the confusion between the object language and the meta language.
Why do paradoxes occur? Is it because the world goes like that? Is it because we see, think and act in a specific way? I think the both are to be taken into consideration, and always at the same time. Why do we respond in such a way to the paradoxes? Well, first because of the feeling of total helplessness, or uncontrollability we feel when the world is vast and have infinity which our finite reason cannot measure or cope with. And when we see things broken or violated, the things that we keep preserving and want to preserve, and that preserve us: the laws or the principles, the dearest things, the norms, the conscious or unconscious practices, or habits. When they are broken or violated it is hard for us to tolerate the situation. So the paradoxes teach us what they are that we preserve and keep. They inform us how we conduct our behaviors, how we choose, and how we react. They raise us our understanding, knowledge, emotion or perception to higher levels when we have understood what paradoxes are and how paradoxes work upon us.
목차
1. 들어가기
2. 역설적 상황의 패턴들
3. 무한함과 모든 것
4. 자기 회귀성
5. 비틀기
6. 모호함
7. 이중성
8. 1인칭 단수 현재
9. 지켜야 할 것들
10. 맺음말
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (16)
참고문헌 신청
1. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 이향천 / 2010 / 양상의 언어 철학적 고찰 / 언어학 (56) : 119 ~ 157
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 이향천 / 2012 / 서술과 구성 / 언어학 (62) : 121 ~ 146
3. [단행본] - Bateson, G. / 2000 / Steps To An Ecology Of Mind / University of Chicago Press
4. [단행본] - Bateson, G. / 1979 / Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity / Hampton Press
5. [단행본] - Fasolt, C. / 2011 / John Calvin, Myth and Reality: Images and Impact of Geneva’s Reformer / Cascade Books of Wipf & Stock : 165 ~ 194
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 이향천 / 2012 / 서술과 구성 / 언어학 (62) : 121 ~ 146
3. [단행본] - Bateson, G. / 2000 / Steps To An Ecology Of Mind / University of Chicago Press
4. [단행본] - Bateson, G. / 1979 / Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity / Hampton Press
5. [단행본] - Fasolt, C. / 2011 / John Calvin, Myth and Reality: Images and Impact of Geneva’s Reformer / Cascade Books of Wipf & Stock : 165 ~ 194
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
최명익 소설의 `역설` 고찰
국어교육연구
2016 .06
-
[On This Topic] The Paradox of the Social Movement Society
Korea Journal
2021 .12
-
언어와 세계 간의 역설(paradox) 구조 : 역설을 대하는 동서양 철학의 입장들
철학논총
2015 .10
-
역설에 대한 전통적 분류
동서철학연구
2015 .06
-
소렌센 더미 역설
논리연구
2017 .01
-
Tennant’s Conjecture for Self-Referential Paradoxes and its Classical Counterexample
논리연구
2021 .01
-
아시아 패러독스(Asia Paradox)를 넘어선 동북아 평화체제의 가능성: 일본의 역내역할과 한・일 협력 방향성 모색
유라시아연구
2020 .01
-
“한겨울의 봄”―｢리틀 기딩｣의 ‘논리’
T. S. 엘리엇연구
2023 .01
-
들뢰즈와 『무문관』의 화두들
불교학보
2017 .06
-
독특한 현상으로서 비극의 역설: 인과적 접근과 동기 접근
美學(미학)
2018 .01
-
오독과 위험: 위험한 담론과 존 던의 글쓰기 전략
영미어문학
2018 .09
-
The Paradoxical Vision of Conrad’s Lord Jim
신영어영문학
2022 .11
-
예술 속 재현과 부정적 감정의 문제
美學(미학)
2017 .01
-
제논의 네 번째(스타디움의) 역설 : 프랑스 철학자들의 해석을 중심으로
철학사상
2015 .08
-
내가 죽어 누워 있을 때에 나타난 의미의 논리와 역설 연구
영어영문학연구
2019 .01
-
이민의 역설에 대한 탐색적 연구: 다문화가정 청소년을 중심으로
다문화와 평화
2021 .08
-
Korean Speakers" Knowledge of the Semantics and Pragmatics of Viewpoint Aspect in English
영어학
2015 .09
-
행복을 희망하는 행복
철학연구
2023 .04
-
소설과 기하학의 역설에 관한 비교연구
비교문학
2015 .10
-
『노자』, 그 ‘역설’의 문학을 논함
중국학
2015 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2016-710-001309279