Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Temsilin Zemini: Benzerlik ve Nedensellik

Year 2020, Volume: 19 Issue: 1, 1 - 24, 25.03.2020

Nazım Gökel

https://doi.org/10.20981/kaygi.698734

Abstract

Çağdaş literatüre göre, felsefe tarihinde iki ayrı temsil kuramı mevcuttur: i) Benzerlikçi Temsil Kuramı ve (ii) Nedenselci Temsil Kuramı. İlk bölümde ve ikinci bölümde, çağdaş literatürde ele alınan şekliyle ikinci kuramın ilk kuramı nasıl altüst ettiğini aktarmaya çalışacağım. Üçüncü bölümde ise, literatürdeki yaygın kanının aksine Nedenselci Kuram’ın Benzerlikçi Kuram’a yönelttiği eleştirilerdeki zayıflıklara ve yer yer hatalara işaret edeceğim. Benim görüşüme göre, Benzerlikçi Kuram eksik olabilir, hatta bir çok açıdan hatalı yanları da olabilir; fakat Nedenselcilerin Benzerlikçilere yönelttiği eleştiri okları ayrıntılı bir şekilde ele alındığında aslında hiç bir okun hedefi vuramadığı görülecektir.

Keywords

Benzerlik Nedensellik Temsil Yönelimsellik Uzlaşım

References

  • ARISTOTELES (1996). Metafizik, çev. Ahmet Arslan, İstanbul: Sosyal Yayınlar.
  • AULETTA, Gennaro (2002). “Is Representation Characterized by Intrinsicity and Causality?”, Intellectica, 35(2): 83-113.
  • AULETTA Gennaro (2003). “Language, Sign and Representation: An Answer to Stewart, Laurent, Reboul and Palma”, Intellectica, 36-37: 401-417.
  • BARTELS, Andreas (2006). “Defending the Structural Concept of Representation”, Theoria, 21/55: 7-19.
  • CUMMINS, Robert (1989). Meaning and Mental Representation, Cambridge, London: MIT Press.
  • CUMMINS, Robert (1996). Representations, Targets and Attitudes, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • DAVIDSON, Donald (1980). “Actions, Reasons and Causes”, Essays on Actions and Events, pp. 3-19, Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press.
  • DENNETT, Daniel C. (1978/1998). “Artificial Intelligence as Philosophy and as Psychology”, Brainstorms: Philosophical Essays on Mind and Psychology, pp. 109-126, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • DRETSKE, Fred I. (1988). Explaining Behavior: Reasons in a World of Causes, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • DRETSKE, Fred I. (1995). Naturalizing the Mind, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • FODOR, Jerry A. (1987). Psychosemantics: The Problem of Meaning in the Philosophy of Mind, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • FODOR, Jerry A. (1992). A Theory of Content and Other Essays, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • FRENCH, Steven (2003). “A Model-Theoretic Account of Representation (Or, I Don’t Know Much about Art… but I Know It Involves Isomorphism)”, Philosophy of Science, 70(5): 1472-1483.
  • GOODMAN, Nelson (1969). Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols, London: Oxford University Press.
  • KANT, Immanuel (1999). Critique of Pure Reason, trans. and ed. by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • LEWIS, David (1973). “Causation”, The Journal of Philosophy, 70(17): 556-567.
  • MACKIE, J. L. (1980). The Cement of the Universe: A Study of Causation, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • MARMODORO, Anna & MAYR, Erasmus (2019). Metaphysics: An Introduction to Contemporary Debates and their History, New York: Oxford University Press.
  • MILLIKAN, Ruth (1984). Language, Thought and Other Biological Categories: New Foundations for Realism, Cambridge, Mass.; London, England: MIT Press.
  • MILLIKAN, Ruth (1989). “Biosemantics”, Journal of Philosophy, 86(6): 281-297.
  • O’BRIEN, Gerard & OPIE, Jon (2004). “Notes Toward a Structuralist Theory of Mental Representation”, Representation in Mind: New Approaches to Mental Representation, ed. by Clapin, Staines and Slezak, pp. 1-20, Amsterdam; Boston: Elsevier.
  • PALMA, Adriano (2003). “On Gennaro Auletta on Representations”, Intellectica, 36-37: 397-399.
  • PAPINEAU, David (1987). Reality and Representation, Oxford, UK; Cambridge, USA: Blackwell.
  • PAPINEAU, David (1993). Philosophical Naturalism, Oxford, UK; Cambridge, USA: Blackwell.
  • PUTNAM, Hilary (1981). Reason, Truth and History, Cambridge [Cambridgeshire]; New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • REBOUL, Anne (2003). “Much Ado about Nothing: a Commentary on Auletta’s Paper”, Intellectica, 36-37: 389-395.
  • STRAWSON, Galen (2018). Things That Bother Me: Death, Freedom, the Self, Etc., New York: New York Review of Books.
  • WITTGENSTEIN, Ludwig (1953/1986). Philosophical Investigations, trans. by G. E. M. Anscombe, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Year 2020, Volume: 19 Issue: 1, 1 - 24, 25.03.2020

Nazım Gökel

https://doi.org/10.20981/kaygi.698734

Abstract

References

  • ARISTOTELES (1996). Metafizik, çev. Ahmet Arslan, İstanbul: Sosyal Yayınlar.
  • AULETTA, Gennaro (2002). “Is Representation Characterized by Intrinsicity and Causality?”, Intellectica, 35(2): 83-113.
  • AULETTA Gennaro (2003). “Language, Sign and Representation: An Answer to Stewart, Laurent, Reboul and Palma”, Intellectica, 36-37: 401-417.
  • BARTELS, Andreas (2006). “Defending the Structural Concept of Representation”, Theoria, 21/55: 7-19.
  • CUMMINS, Robert (1989). Meaning and Mental Representation, Cambridge, London: MIT Press.
  • CUMMINS, Robert (1996). Representations, Targets and Attitudes, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • DAVIDSON, Donald (1980). “Actions, Reasons and Causes”, Essays on Actions and Events, pp. 3-19, Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press.
  • DENNETT, Daniel C. (1978/1998). “Artificial Intelligence as Philosophy and as Psychology”, Brainstorms: Philosophical Essays on Mind and Psychology, pp. 109-126, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • DRETSKE, Fred I. (1988). Explaining Behavior: Reasons in a World of Causes, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • DRETSKE, Fred I. (1995). Naturalizing the Mind, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • FODOR, Jerry A. (1987). Psychosemantics: The Problem of Meaning in the Philosophy of Mind, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • FODOR, Jerry A. (1992). A Theory of Content and Other Essays, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • FRENCH, Steven (2003). “A Model-Theoretic Account of Representation (Or, I Don’t Know Much about Art… but I Know It Involves Isomorphism)”, Philosophy of Science, 70(5): 1472-1483.
  • GOODMAN, Nelson (1969). Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols, London: Oxford University Press.
  • KANT, Immanuel (1999). Critique of Pure Reason, trans. and ed. by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • LEWIS, David (1973). “Causation”, The Journal of Philosophy, 70(17): 556-567.
  • MACKIE, J. L. (1980). The Cement of the Universe: A Study of Causation, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • MARMODORO, Anna & MAYR, Erasmus (2019). Metaphysics: An Introduction to Contemporary Debates and their History, New York: Oxford University Press.
  • MILLIKAN, Ruth (1984). Language, Thought and Other Biological Categories: New Foundations for Realism, Cambridge, Mass.; London, England: MIT Press.
  • MILLIKAN, Ruth (1989). “Biosemantics”, Journal of Philosophy, 86(6): 281-297.
  • O’BRIEN, Gerard & OPIE, Jon (2004). “Notes Toward a Structuralist Theory of Mental Representation”, Representation in Mind: New Approaches to Mental Representation, ed. by Clapin, Staines and Slezak, pp. 1-20, Amsterdam; Boston: Elsevier.
  • PALMA, Adriano (2003). “On Gennaro Auletta on Representations”, Intellectica, 36-37: 397-399.
  • PAPINEAU, David (1987). Reality and Representation, Oxford, UK; Cambridge, USA: Blackwell.
  • PAPINEAU, David (1993). Philosophical Naturalism, Oxford, UK; Cambridge, USA: Blackwell.
  • PUTNAM, Hilary (1981). Reason, Truth and History, Cambridge [Cambridgeshire]; New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • REBOUL, Anne (2003). “Much Ado about Nothing: a Commentary on Auletta’s Paper”, Intellectica, 36-37: 389-395.
  • STRAWSON, Galen (2018). Things That Bother Me: Death, Freedom, the Self, Etc., New York: New York Review of Books.
  • WITTGENSTEIN, Ludwig (1953/1986). Philosophical Investigations, trans. by G. E. M. Anscombe, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
There are 28 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Nazım Gökel This is me 0000-0003-4356-8563

Publication Date March 25, 2020
Submission Date March 4, 2020
Published in Issue Year 2020 Volume: 19 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Gökel, N. (2020). Temsilin Zemini: Benzerlik ve Nedensellik. Kaygı. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi, 19(1), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.20981/kaygi.698734
AMA Gökel N. Temsilin Zemini: Benzerlik ve Nedensellik. Kaygı. March 2020;19(1):1-24. doi:10.20981/kaygi.698734
Chicago Gökel, Nazım. “Temsilin Zemini: Benzerlik Ve Nedensellik”. Kaygı. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi 19, no. 1 (March 2020): 1-24. https://doi.org/10.20981/kaygi.698734.
EndNote Gökel N (March 1, 2020) Temsilin Zemini: Benzerlik ve Nedensellik. Kaygı. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi 19 1 1–24.
IEEE N. Gökel, “Temsilin Zemini: Benzerlik ve Nedensellik”, Kaygı, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 1–24, 2020, doi: 10.20981/kaygi.698734.
ISNAD Gökel, Nazım. “Temsilin Zemini: Benzerlik Ve Nedensellik”. Kaygı. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi 19/1 (March 2020), 1-24. https://doi.org/10.20981/kaygi.698734.
JAMA Gökel N. Temsilin Zemini: Benzerlik ve Nedensellik. Kaygı. 2020;19:1–24.
MLA Gökel, Nazım. “Temsilin Zemini: Benzerlik Ve Nedensellik”. Kaygı. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi, vol. 19, no. 1, 2020, pp. 1-24, doi:10.20981/kaygi.698734.
Vancouver Gökel N. Temsilin Zemini: Benzerlik ve Nedensellik. Kaygı. 2020;19(1):1-24.

e-ISSN: 2645-8950