Masters Degrees (Philosophy)

Permanent URI for this collection

http://hdl.handle.net/11660/579

Browse

Browsing Masters Degrees (Philosophy) by Author "Van Reenen, Dionne"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Key structures in philosophical discourse : a universal semantics of kernel phrases
    (University of the Free State, 2013-02-01) Van Reenen, Dionne; Visagie, P. J.
    English: Key theory, or Logosemantics, was formulated by Johann Visagie as part of a larger project known as Discourse Archaeology (DA) which is an interlocking set of sub-theories designed to investigate the structures, systems, patterns and relationships that occur in philosophical discourse. The present study gives a brief overview of the whole of DA so that Key theory can be placed in the context of Visagie’s expansive venture. The historical background from which Key theory emerged is sketched showing where the theory finds points of contact with thinkers in the field of philosophy who previously considered such occurrences in discourse. The systematic context looks to formulate a detailed explanation of Key theory components and their functions, as well as demonstrate its critical, pedagogical and descriptive import in the field of philosophy. A number of different philosophers’ work from varying fields, epochs and traditions is used to illustrate the diverse applications of the theory. In contrast, similarities between key elements are further used to diagnose typologies and trends across different time frames and conventions of thought. Seeing that all of the DA sub-theories operate within a systematic approach, the links to the sub-theories of Figurative Semiotic theory and Epistemic theory will also be explored as they are housed in the same faculty of the broader theory. In order to reach a fully generative analysis, it has proven fruitful to interface various departments with one another in order to form complexes which show the protological diversity required to begin asking the kinds of questions that initiate a detailed analysis. The target area for forming this line of inquiry is chosen as ethics and morality as it is an area which has proven notoriously complicated and often difficult for philosophy to deal with effectively either in explanation or evaluation. The link to Anthropology theory gives a brief outline of the possibility that the hierarchical structure contained in keys is universally representative of human theory-forming capacities. We seem to be constrained in some way to think like this and, consequently, we do not propose a rejection of all keys. We do suggest a deconstruction of keys so that the careful unpacking of concepts contained in, and implied by, key formulations can be evaluated and reconstructed with as much legitimacy as possible. The anticipation is to investigate the validity of acceptable key formulations and look for new conceptual links to replace or rework unacceptable formulations. This is a multi-disciplinary move away from absolutizations of thought and pure theory which we no longer consider plausible in philosophy.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Key structures in philosophical discourse: a universal semantics of kernel phrases
    (University of the Free State, 2013-02) Van Reenen, Dionne; Visagie, P. J.
    English: Key theory, or Logosemantics, was formulated by Johann Visagie as part of a larger project known as Discourse Archaeology (DA) which is an interlocking set of sub-theories designed to investigate the structures, systems, patterns and relationships that occur in philosophical discourse. The present study gives a brief overview of the whole of DA so that Key theory can be placed in the context of Visagie’s expansive venture. The historical background from which Key theory emerged is sketched showing where the theory finds points of contact with thinkers in the field of philosophy who previously considered such occurrences in discourse. The systematic context looks to formulate a detailed explanation of Key theory components and their functions, as well as demonstrate its critical, pedagogical and descriptive import in the field of philosophy. A number of different philosophers’ work from varying fields, epochs and traditions is used to illustrate the diverse applications of the theory. In contrast, similarities between key elements are further used to diagnose typologies and trends across different time frames and conventions of thought. Seeing that all of the DA sub-theories operate within a systematic approach, the links to the sub-theories of Figurative Semiotic theory and Epistemic theory will also be explored as they are housed in the same faculty of the broader theory. In order to reach a fully generative analysis, it has proven fruitful to interface various departments with one another in order to form complexes which show the protological diversity required to begin asking the kinds of questions that initiate a detailed analysis. The target area for forming this line of inquiry is chosen as ethics and morality as it is an area which has proven notoriously complicated and often difficult for philosophy to deal with effectively either in explanation or evaluation. The link to Anthropology theory gives a brief outline of the possibility that the hierarchical structure contained in keys is universally representative of human theory-forming capacities. We seem to be constrained in some way to think like this and, consequently, we do not propose a rejection of all keys. We do suggest a deconstruction of keys so that the careful unpacking of concepts contained in, and implied by, key formulations can be evaluated and reconstructed with as much legitimacy as possible. The anticipation is to investigate the validity of acceptable key formulations and look for new conceptual links to replace or rework unacceptable formulations. This is a multi-disciplinary move away from absolutizations of thought and pure theory which we no longer consider plausible in philosophy.