Concept

The question of what is meant by term must be understood and what is its function, has a long history in philosophy and plays a non-negligible role until today, so especially in the disciplines of philosophy of mind, epistemology and ontology as well as in adjacent scientific disciplines such as psychology and approaches to formal knowledge representation. Principle terms can be distinguished from properties and on the other hand of articles on the one hand; General terms of the latter are classically formed first, share the different individuals with each other and which can be brought into a hierarchy of genera and species. Some philosophers call beyond even terms for single individuals to so-called individual concepts.

Conventional philosophical concept theories can initially be divided into five main families, which differ mainly in terms of Individuationskriterien of terms:

2.2.1 Boëthius
2.2.2 Arab Theology and Philosophy

2.4.1 Descartes
2.4.2 The Logic of Port Royal
2.4.3 Locke
2.4.4 Leibniz

2.5.1 Kant
2.5.2 Hegel
2.5.3 Bolzano
2.5.4 Husserl

2.6.1 Frege
2.6.2 Gadamer
2.6.3 Critical Theory
2.6.4 Formation of semiotics

3.1 Basic meanings
3.2 Intension and extension
3.3 distinction between concept and word 3.3.1 Uniqueness and ambiguity

3.4.1 Individual term and general term
3.4.2 generic term / narrower term
3.4.3 generic term / concept of species
3.4.4 Concrete / abstract concepts
3.4.5 Compatible products / incompatible terms

Etymology

The modern German term " concept " derives from the Middle High German and Early New High German of comprehension or begrifunge from. In a prevailing until the 14th century the importance it has been understood in the sense of ' scope ' and thus spoken, for example, the concept of a city.

History of Philosophy

In philosophy, especially in the working area of the logic, the term concept has a long history. In the speech, certain expressions can be used to determine one or more items. This raises early on whether they refer to the immutable characteristics, ideas in the mind or the things themselves.

Antiquity

Socrates

It should be noted that, strictly speaking, neither Socrates, Plato, Aristotle still have an expression of what we call the term today. The Socrates of the Platonic dialogues has provided for the first time explicitly, the question of the general characteristics of things and actions in a methodical form.

Aristotle says of Socrates that he had been the first who asked not only after what something is made , but by what it is ( τί ἐστι ). The aim of Socratic questioning was a universal, indubitable definition ( ὁρισμός ) that he wanted to lure out from its counterparts by identifying aporias. Socrates is not satisfied with an indication of cases or examples of a thing. So he does not ask for examples of virtuous action, but want to know what is virtue itself. He urged his listeners to, the General ( καθόλου, literally, in terms of the whole ) to extract from individuals ( ἕκαστον ). That's what always remains the same in all the multiplicity of individual cases.

Plato

Plato follows the teachings of Parmenides and Heraclitus. Because the sensible world is in constant flux and we can not say that something is so and so, provides the experience of sensory perception no knowledge or certain knowledge ( episteme ). These are available only from the immutable entity which can be recognized only thinking. The thinking ( noesis dianoia ), he called a meeting of the soul with itself (dia - logos, dialegésthai ). So speaking or linguistic and rational, discursive thought ( dianoia ) are tightly coupled. It may just be the one object of knowledge, which from λόγος (logos, speech, reason ) is conceptualized. Plato distinguishes two types of terms. Immutable, actually existent forms or archetypes that exist independently of the individual things and beings, which only appears through the individual things. In the early dialogues can be no specific terms for such a thing as unchanging forms in his texts determine. Only since the middle dialogues for the expressions εἶδος ( eidos ) and ἰδέα (idea, idea) crystallize out the form a recurring theme in the history of the term.

When asked what something is, the λόγος must, according to Plato an answer in the form of giving: what each (actually ) is ( ὃ ποτε ὅν ). In some places it says to him, the definition is an indication of the nature of something or what essentially belongs to beings ( λόγος τῆς οὐσίας ). Order (for example, the virtue or a bee ) to determine a being, one must specify not only where it differs from other things, but essential for its determination is the indication in which it is identical to all the individuals of its species, or like Friedrich Schleiermacher puts it, what its nature is. Plato now says that the ούσία ( ousia ) the being a distinct shape or form, the ειδος, gives that can only be known by reason. That ειδος not go up in a definition. Rather, it forms in Plato with her two complementary types of access to beings. A being is conceived discursively by the definition, that is, it is advanced from one idea to another with logical necessity. In contrast, its essence is grasped intuitively. Definitions are representations of ideas in the λόγος. Through them, an attempt is made to determine the universal, which makes it possible at all to address many individual cases as something identical. Idea and being different from the world of phenomena, that they are sensuous, in principle conceivable only.

Plato uses many circumlocutions for the ideas (→ theory of ideas ). They are the medium of detecting or recognizing all beings and have share by nature in both worlds. The changeable things are only being because they share the ideas. The question of what is aimed at the idea of being. The name refers to one hand the idea of the individual thing itself, and on the other hand, the concrete individual. The ideas do not fall to the λόγος easy, but must sharing idea, he calls this Dihairesis be obtained and at the same time justified. To distinguish this art by genus falls into the dialectical science.

According to Plato, the terms do not go on in definitions. A definition is just the beginning and the foundation of their determining. The common idea and concept is a relationship which is produced from general to specific in them or by them. More precisely, the idea being to order and heard the term in Plato to the order of knowledge. The term may contain many individual cases among themselves. On the idea of many individual cases have some. It is something in which they agree. A kind of knowledge he calls νοειν ( " capture ", "grasp ", " view "). It is aimed directly at the ideas, but can not be expressed in appropriate language. The other kind of knowledge, διανοειν (of dianoia " reflection ", " mind " ), focuses on the relationships between the ideas in the form of concepts. This type can be immediately notified. The highest genera or formal terms are for Plato being, sameness (identity), diversity, exercise and rest. In these forms of all beings is done. Without the mutual interdependence of ideas, there is no reasoned speech.

Aristotle

Aristotle criticized Plato's doctrine of ideas as existing substances for themselves or entities. He says that the idea is only one and must not fall apart in a number of existing moments for themselves. The demanded by Socrates General ( καθόλου ) he defined as " [ ... ] what is suitable, as to be used in three sets Included on, [ ... ] (or) what his nature after several plays ." Only he speaks to the General from the substantiality. He says that it should not be seen as separate from the individual. The General falls with him both in knowledge, as well as in sensory perception. Thus Aristotle is in contrast to Plato, who denies knowledge of supersensible. Furthermore, the General does not go on in the preamble, as each generic Although General, but not every General is a generic term. However, there can be no terms of particulars, because it is impossible to define a sensual thing.

Aristotle often uses the terms λόγος and ὅρος with the meaning of term or "essence ( οὐσια ) of a thing ." This must be determined by the definition or definition ( ὀριομος ). The definition is so essential to the notion that he often equates with ὀριομος λόγος and ὅρος. General terms are formed for him from a kind of induction of individual things. They are only valid as scientific, if they are determined by a definition. Terms of a higher level are the predicables, like the categories, however, do not relate to the things themselves, but only in the form of statements about things are determinable at him. Of great importance for the later period is that he says that the terms were only determined if it was possible for it to set a linguistic expression whose meaning must be clearly delimited and fixed stand. Otherwise, they are neither feasible nor determinable. It differs in its logic between terms from which the judgments are put together. Judgments in turn aggregate to logical conclusions.

Of great influence on the later is what was later called his theory of concepts as intentions, or " passiones animae ". After that written words are the signs spoken, these describe thoughts and the thoughts are natural patterns of things. The basic idea is that there is a natural ( unadulterated and direct ) relationship between images and things. The terms provide a natural way.

Stoa

In the Stoa is found for the notion that expressions σημαινόμενον ( semainómenon ) and λεκτὀν ( LESSON ). You can be translated as " meaning of a linguistic expression ." For the Stoics are the λεκτά ( lektá ) on the one hand in the middle between the modes of thought and things. On the other hand, they should be identical to the contents of thought ( νοήματα noemata ). They can be either as intensional objects or as incorporeal word meanings interpret. Reasonable it seems they connected me to the latter meaning to see in the logical sense as an objective meaning of linguistic expressions. Thereafter, only the speech sounds, but not the meanings associated with them His coming to.

Ancient comments

Aristotle had said in De Anima of first terms. In his commentary on Aristotle's category font Dexippos (4th century ) distinguishes first and second terms ( protai noeseis, deuterai epinoiai ):

This distinction between two types of thesis can be considered a precursor of the Latin distinction between two types of ( in ) positioned ( Boethius, and others) or in Arabic two wad ' be judged ( Farabi and others).

A similar distinction as Dexippos can also be found in the De anima commentary of Themistius ( fourth century): first terms ( such as day, light, Socrates ) are simple and can be combined by the Spirit, so that, inter alia meanings of sentences, "second thoughts " arise.

Middle Ages

Boëthius

The decisive step for a term understanding that our modern corresponds more or less, Boehme looks only at Boëthius. He sees the term as a successor to the Aristotelian idea of how it is only in the mind. In Plato, it is still quite " metaphysical " principle, which refers to the being. Boëthius meant by term explicitly an intermediary between the soul and what it recognizes as being from things.

Boethius, Abelard and Ockham take the concept of passiones animae Aristotle again. For all three terms of first order are natural signs in consciousness that denote things in a unique way. These are again denoted by words, but their meaning is based on agreement. Characters form either one-or ambiguous signs of the terms. The second stage terms, so-called semantic predicates refer to the first. Boethius 's been using the expression conceptio. Other Latin words were: conceptus, intentio, intellectus, signum rei, and verbum mentale.

Arab Theology and Philosophy

The Arab logic ( mantic ) acts according to the classical definition of terms ( taṣawwurāt ) and judgments ( taṣdīḳāṭ ) by proceeds from known to unknown words or sentences. "Short " steps relate this progress by definition or by Hadd rasm; by analogous judgment ( Kiya ), by induction ( istiḳrā ʾ ) or comparison ( tamthīl ); "Long" steps relate to the consideration of the general public or special feature of a term or proof by contrast or contradiction. For this purpose, the terms used have the judgment subjects ( mawdoo ʿ at) and their attributes ( maḥmūlāt ) are investigated.

In addition to the aforementioned approximate equivalents to the German term " expression" is the expression used complicated ma ʿ na ( plural ma ʿ ANI) important. This refers to ( as Maksud, niyya and Murad ) in the Arabic grammar and philosophy of language the intended content of linguistic issue, the by grammatical analysis ( takdir ) determinable semantic content of a linguistic expression ( lafẓ ), in particular the pattern ( Binya ) of a root word (ASL ). In this context, ma ʿ Nā similarly used as the Greek expression lekton in the Stoa. The differentiation of logic and grammar happens along the opposition of ma ʿ na ( object of logic ) and lafẓ ( subject of the grammar). Of distinguishable is the opposite of ism ( linguistic sign as a whole) and musammā ( representational thought or speaker ).

In philosophical works, the terms ma ʿ NA and ma ʿ KUL are often used to reproduce the Greek expression noema, partly for "meaning" in general, about the same direction as the stoic lekton. The forms of things are usually referred to as Suwar, but partly also as ma ʿ nA. Avicenna distinguishes between ma ʿ ani in a first and a second Understanding ( abstract concepts ), similar to Porphyrius between first and second impositio. The Aristotelian categories are referred to as ma ʿ Kulat. Avicenna speaks of intelligible terms, ma ʿ ani ma ʿ Kula, often translated in Latin as intellecta.

The Mu ʿ ammar mu'tazilitische theology uses the term ma ʿ Na in central function: it is Individuationsprinzipien for substances and the real foundation of the phenomena of accidents. Each ma ʿ NA instance of it has its basis in a lying ahead instance, what an infinite regress generated, but breaks off in an identified with God first cause, which thus is real cause for the diversity of accidental phenomena. The textual reconstruction and interpretation is controversial. It has this concept of ma ʿ ani connected to the Platonic concept ( Horovitz ), with the Aristotelian physis - term ( nature brings movement and peace out ) ( Wolfson ), as well as intrinsic causal determinant, and although originally not for accidents, but as a material substrate of atoms, which is traceable to Stoic origins (Peter Frank); On the other hand one has seen them in relational, not substantive principles (Hans Daiber ).

Similar Dexippus represents al -Farabi ( 870-950 to ) the view that the ten Aristotelian categories only first terms deal among themselves; the copula is interpreted as a secondary concept.

In his compendium about the soul distinguishes Avicenna ( Ibn Sīnā, 980-1037 ) two sources of concepts or ideas or intelligible forms:

After Avicenna beings does not come to existence per se. You can either first exist in the mind -independent reality, as a form of an entity as a property bundle that composite substances describes or 2 only as concepts in the mind, or 3 and are only in it so far over to be or not in the sense of the existence of the concept neutral. Essence and existence is thus distinguished ( for all the items, but not for God ): whether a thing belongs existence is contingent ( and is owed only to the divine creation).

High Middle Ages and Renaissance

Discuss many of the medieval theorists, whether general concepts ( universals ) play an independent real existence. This so-called conceptual or universals are contrary to the positions that general concepts only an existence in the spirit have (so-called conceptualism ), or only in the form of linguistic expressions exist (so-called vowel, somewhat less accurate " nominalism "). This concerned in particular not only transcendentals ( the good, the true, etc.), genus and species-concepts ( mankind, etc. ), but also substantialisierbare property terms ( redness, etc.).

Even on issues of concept acquisition different positions including a nativism or Innativismus were represented, (terms are innate ), a mostly connected with abstraction theories empiricism ( terms are actively formed by generalization of elements of sensuous intuition ), as well as different variants of a Verdanktheit of terms such example of an "active intellect ," which was often identified with God.

According to Ockham, there are three types of utterance: the written, spoken and mental expression. However, he refers to Boethius and speaks of a mental logos. Accordingly, there are three different types of terms that occur only in the intellect. For conceptual term, he says it is

He differs from Aristotle and Boethius view to understand the sounds of spoken speech as a sign of the soul. For both terms are spoken ideas of the soul. For Ockhman only certain expressions like " idea ", "thought" and term denote the impressions of the soul, and no extra-mental things. Ockham criticizes those who hold the products of the soul neither substances nor accidents and for some of the soul -made. Doing, they would fall out of the circle of natural things. He also criticized its representational character described by Aristotle. After that, they are more or less similar things. But if they would not substances or accidents, they would be different from the things more than the things themselves. The natural signs for him are acts or " realities " of the soul. You are not different from the soul. These acts are, like the things they designate, to be understood as individual things. With several such acts formed an idea that can be true or false.

Early Modern and Classical

Descartes

In the 17th and 18th century, the focus shifted from the recital in the context of discovery of concepts. Great influence Descartes had use of the term idea, which replaced the scholastic terminology. Descartes is roughly assigned to the rationalism. The intellect is to bring forth for him in principle able ideas independent of experience. This is based on his assumption of innate ideas, which always are in the mind. He tries to analyze by reducing complex sentences so that is their dependence on intuitive insightful principles emerges. For a logical- mathematical intuition is necessary.

It separates two worlds radically or substances: the res cogitans and the res extensa. According to Descartes, only that may be true, which is clearly seen. For this, two conditions must be met: First, the problems to be analyzed must be divided into small units so that it is the intuition possible to see through them. For the clarity and distinctness of knowledge called the natural light is responsible. Second, however, does the brightness of that light, and thus the power of the mind (or his ability to ever be able to recognize things ) by the power of its author, God from. Only God has for him the power to the spiritual connect with the physical world. Therefore, he is still trying to prove God. Important here is that he prefers the idea of the infinite finite ideas. Terms of finite being can only be formed so that the idea of the Infinite determined, is limited. This idea will pick up again later Spinoza and Hegel. Wolfgang Röd summarizes Descartes basic idea as follows:

The Logic of Port Royal

The 1662 published logic of Port Royal, written by Arnauld and Nicole, builds on approaches of late scholasticism and early modern updates to, especially on Descartes and is influential for modern philosophy of language, logic and theory of concepts. Central is a representation theory of the concept or the idea:

This definition was to speak for Michel Foucault occasion, from a doubled representation structure. Other philosophy of language and conceptual theoretical interests are aimed at the hypothesis of innateness of concepts. In this sense, for example, early Noam Chomsky discussed the Port Royal logic and the almost simultaneous grammar of Port Royal. Also in the first chapter of logic, for example, postulates:

Explicitly between conceptual content ( intension as a complex of concept attributes, compréhension ) and term scope distinction is (extension as the set of potentially covered by the concept of individuals and species, étendue ) with Arnauld and Nicole. This distinction is in substance already in Porphyry and among others also in many medieval representations of the Suppositionstheorie. Intension and extension in doing so are inversely proportional to each other ( more precisely, the term content is determined, the less individuals or species excluded and vice versa). A deviation to the modern extension concept is that Arnauld / Nicole also species and not only individuals count. Younger models of formal concept analysis present this two-dimensionality of terms with explicit reference based on the Port Royal Logic.

Curl

Locke opposed the radical doctrine of innate ideas. He designed his theory of signs, are distinguished in the simple and complex terms. Words are " the sensuous character of the ideas of him who uses them [ ... ] " They stand for the ideas ( or concepts ) of the mind ( mind ) for him. This, and that they are represented by names, it is possible to speak about classes of things or properties of properties. Simple terms are not in the mind, but only be gained through direct experience. The general terms are a product of abstraction and are formed from the mind. Overall, it makes the empirical epistemology that there concepts with ideas or images are equated in the mind. Berkeley rejects this reason, general and abstract concepts strictly from.

Leibniz

See: Leibniz's concept of logic; Descartes below are for Leibniz clarity and precision sufficient characteristics of a term.

Modern

Kant

Only Kant distinguishes strictly between ideas and concepts. He divides them into experience, understanding ( categories) and a rational concepts (ideas). After his Transcendental Aesthetic arise views only of sensuality and concepts alone the mind. These two so-called tribes of knowledge but are inextricably linked, so that there can be no concepts without intuition and vice versa. Concepts without intuition would ( as a conclusion of the Transcendental Aesthetic ) empty. In the Transcendental Analytic Kant undertakes to show that even intuitions without concepts can not exist because they were blind. Terms are the mind in its work to judge. Judgments can be traced back to them upstream general judgments until you finally come to a panel of elementary judgments from which Kant finally deduced the table of the logical categories of the understanding. The categories serve the intellect to synthesize the diversity of the received sense impressions to a realization. In the Transcendental Deduction, he shows that the activities of sensibility and understanding in addition always of the Cartesian consciousness of I think ( he calls this " transcendental apperception " ) must be accompanied, so that laws can never exist in the phenomena, but only in knowing subject. Objective knowledge is thus always linked to the cognitive ability of the subject. At the end of his investigation Kant poses the question whether it is possible in addition to the knowledge of the objective world of phenomena to win ( by the previously shown interaction between sensibility and understanding ) also purely mental conceptions ( noumena, as God, freedom, immortality of the soul) what he denies. Where this is done, because the reason gaukele itself with the means of their own apparatus itself before anything. Only where the sensuality connect with the mind - that term would be filled with content - certain knowledge was possible.

Hegel

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel calls it one of the greatest insights of Kant to have seen that our experience content only reality and truth, when they are brought together by the thinking ego under terms. Only they have with him not only a cognitive -giving function, but are " an active principle which is reality based and makes it what it is. " They are as be construed moving, dialectical, living concepts that due to the they are inherent tensions and change constantly in confrontation with their respective subject matter and its dynamics. Hegel demands that the concept of a thing not of the outside is applied to them, but that it is to evolve from their own rules. The examination of the knowledge of the subject is at the same time their scale. The philosophy was to take the effort of the term to themselves. The dialectical movement of things is the movement of the concept, its medium in which they come together, or for the subject really, because in principle subject to him, canceled in Hegel's language in it. Petra Gehring is to include the following features of the concept:

The theme of reality is Hegel in the form of substance ratio in his doctrine of essence from. The categories of essence, which still belong to the realm of necessity, refer implicitly to a subject knowledge, which is then clearly expressed in the doctrine of the concept. The concept is the unity of being and essence. He brings these dimensions in motion, " in Freedom and specifically for the subject together." He tried in the realm of freedom from the derive of necessity rather compares them to be incompatible. Hegel identifies the concept of liberty and freedom with the ego, which is broader than pure self- consciousness. A so -understood I is in freedom, for it is a " relationship that is as relation to other self-relation ". The self-conscious ego is thus an identity that holds all conceived as their differences in itself. The term is understood not only something subjective, but is now the only reality for the subject, that is always chained to the determination of objectivity. Just drop its provisions into the subject. He takes the fact of the concepts of freedom and not just out but tried to show their genesis. It should be noted that the General is thought of as an activity and not as an abstract Something that includes things only, but as a real movement of reason.

The term is always the unity of immediacy, that is of being, as it directly represents and the reflection of the same, that is, for Hegel, the manner in which the essence appears by, or on being. All existence is through him at the same time direct and mediated, ie set by thinking. But this is only the pure abstraction, which is only the form of the concept. However, it depends on the fact that he is specifically developed and is getting richer. The Allerkonkreteste for him is God or the Absolute Spirit. There can be as not being beyond the term. Just more or less conscious or developed concepts. The concept of the concept is first posited the unity of and in-and- for -itself and the second unit of universality, particularity and detail, each of these moments is in each case as the unit claims to be and the other moments. Such a term is determined only by itself.

Bolzano

From antiquity to the focal point was to see in terms of mental signs or forms of things. In the 19th century, on the one hand, more and more the language component of concept formation on the topic and on the other hand look at emerging logics of the concept under a different light, or take a job with him at all superfluous. The emphasis on the linguistic component lay Vico, Hamann, Herder and Wilhelm von Humboldt.

Bolzano is available opposite. He strictly distinguishes between concepts in the logical and the psychological sense. For him, they are not real acts of thought, but "what is thought in a thought. In psychological terms, they are the subject of the presentation. There are, subjective ideas ', which are subjective notions of words and ideas in itself, " unique linguistic expressions. He also distinguishes between simple and complex ideas, " ideas " and " concepts to [ ... ] all notions hot, which neither even simple individual ideas are, nor like parts contain " Bolzano's understanding of concept scope and term content, thus deviating from the tradition from. For him, the term content of an idea is the sum of the parts of which it consists. The term scope is made up of the objects referred to by the notion. According to Bolzano would be better to speak instead of characteristics of a term of elements of the concept and features of the thing to which the term refers.

Bolzano had to Husserl and Meinong direct and indirect influence on Moore and Russell. The classical logic of terms has been replaced more and more by the theory of linguistic signs by the influence of logic ( system of Logik/1843 ) by John Stuart Mills. In their terms are considered " meanings of linguistic expressions ".

Husserl

Husserl criticized already in the Prolegomena to Pure Logic, the repatriation of the terms on their genesis and retorts their validity qua ideality of meaning. Terms for the purposes of meanings according to the first Logical Investigation species, respectively. ideal objects. This represents at least the early Husserl, a form of platonisierendem conceptual realism, which the meanings a - awards yet just ideal being - of course not real. Difficult to decide and controversial in the literature is the extent to which even the late (r ) n Husserl can be assumed a Platonic theory of concepts or meanings which should play a role in this decision which criteria.

According to Husserl and Frege also first and second stage is to distinguish between terms. Terms of second stage are " terms of concepts and other ideal entities ".

20th century and the present

As part of the so-called linguistic turn in philosophy came to the development of analytic philosophy, which claimed that many philosophical problems in reality problems of inaccuracy of everyday language are. Significant pioneers of analytic philosophy are Gottlob Frege, Ludwig Wittgenstein and Bertrand Russell. The linguistic turn led to the emergence of semiotics as a new science.

Frege

→ Main article: Begriffsschrift

Gottlob Frege proposes to use terms only in the logical sense and to give it the meaning of a grammatical predicate. For him, " a term [ ... ] a ( set, note) function whose value is always a truth value. " In other terms, a linguistic structure, " from which one can win vacancies wahrheitsdefinite statements by filling in the [ ... ] that is, statements that have the truth value true or false " and in the same sense," a set of function of one variable "," if it is either a valid or an invalid judgment for each value of the variable from its domain of definition. "

According to Frege objects have properties, concepts traits and characteristics. The features of a concept are part of contents of the whole concept. The term " person" has, among others, the term " living beings ". "Visible" is not a property, but a feature of the term " visible object ".

Of particular importance is the realization that existence is a property of concepts, not objects. Numbers are according to attributes of concepts first stage, covered by the items.

See also: his writings Function and Meaning - On Sense and Reference

Gadamer

According to Gadamer, the meaning of each word schöpt only from the conversation. For him, abstract conceptual thinking is a genuine indicator of western philosophy. The term is, however, in an always new -to-understand context of the experience of the world that is not subsumed alone in a concept, but is also determined by the pre-understanding of the interpreter. Here he takes Heidegger's model of the hermeneutic circle. He asks whether an abstract concept, just as he is about the game of philosophy, does not represent a leading astray instrumental abstraction when it is considered in isolation.

For him, concepts are tied to the language. In it opens or opens up the whole horizon of understanding of the world and are all instances of meaning already involved. The terms of the language are one hand passed down by tradition, on the other hand offer it to think the only way new tradition. This process is in principle open. The horizon of the world of experience permanent shifts in this way. A word can not be exhausted by the concept after hermeneutic conception of language. Language is always metaphorical. This imagery of the language is the terminology before and takes over their leadership.

Critical Theory

The Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School illuminates the function of science and their conceptual systems in society. Particular attention she puts it on the context of justification, or the legitimacy of socio-determinative interpretation patterns. This way of working can already be found in the linguistic and socio-critical studies of Walter Benjamin. Your historical- dialectical understanding of the term, it has developed, among other things based on Hegel, Marx and Freud, and later in confrontation with the neo-positivists ( Frege, Russell, Carnap ) and its critics ( Popper ). After understanding the critical theory of the ideal of positive sciences, the mere filing of the facts in a logically - consistent conceptual systems, without whose reflexive penetration. The delusion of consistency has a direct impact on social practice. Horkheimer points out that the very notion of fact of the era and the conception of society depends on:

After her understanding it is not possible to place a prefabricated whatever term system to the so-called facts. Adorno is based on Hegel, when he says that the method of science changed with its object, however, to Marx when he believes to recognize the cause of this change in the changes of the objects underlying material substrates.

Emergence of semiotics

On Charles Sanders Peirce and the sketch first, a strong historical development of the most important modern research program of a science is declining, which examines how certain objects denote other objects, the so-called semiotics. Other classics of the discipline are Charles W. Morris, Thomas A. Sebeok and Umberto Eco. Also, the linguist Ferdinand de Saussure has made fundamental contributions. These would include the differentiation of human speech in general ( langage ), the abstract system of rules that govern this ( langue ) and individual acts concretely consummated speech ( parole); Furthermore, an analysis of character, for a two-part structure of signifier and signified. This analysis has been widely modified. Inter alia has been proposed to replace them with a three-part structure. An example of such modification is the proposal by Charles Kay Ogden and IA Richards. The components are here icon, idea or reference and referent. The latter is a concrete object;, there was no direct equivalent in Saussure. This proposal V.A. exchanges the terms from opposite the model of Peirce; but he is so popular that is spoken now and again of " the " semiotic triangle.

Systematic aspects

Basic meanings

A reflected, philosophical or scientific term is defined in rule by a definition that describes its properties and separates it from other concepts. Especially in class terms, other provisions are discussed. Term:

Intension and extension

→ Main article: Extension and Intension The terms " morning star " and " evening star " refer to the same object, Venus, however, the classical analysis, among others Frege, in different ways. It describes such differences usually by the distinction between " intension " ( way of reference, connotation ) and "Extension" ( a reference class of the reference objects, concept circumference).

Distinction between concept and word

A term is referred to by a word or symbol; he can carry several names, both by words in different languages and in a language (synonyms). Wearing various terms equivalent terms, this is called homonymy.

Uniqueness and ambiguity

Ideally, a word is only a concept, in this case it is called clear ( univocal ). In the vernacular, it is normally the case that a word for different concepts is, it is then referred to as ambiguous ( equivocal ). In this sense, the homonymy and polysemy equivocity comprises of words. In a broader sense equivocity also includes the case with one that more words for the same concept are ( synonymy ).

Uniqueness ( univocity ) the terminology is a rarely attained ideal of every language of science. Misunderstandings and manipulations life of the ambiguity ( equivocity ) the expressions. A disambiguation is used to resolve these ambiguities. In the formalized languages the uniqueness of meaning is inevitable.

Types of terms

Terms can be classified according to various criteria. The language and the intended meaning varies each partially between different theorists.

Individual concept and general concept

A general term applies after conventional explication on features that have several items in common, such as their red color, or detects a common class of individuals, such as " living beings ". Whether such general concepts or universals lecture on something or are to be identified with objects that have an independent existence outside the Thought becoming, is controversially debated for centuries, see about universals. An " individual concept " refers, however, only on a single object, an individual, much like a proper name at the level of the language. Many philosophers have debated whether even exist individual concepts. Summing up, for example, the term genesis always an abstraction of general properties, this seems questionable. ( It can, under the assumption that knowledge is conceived general terms, the resulting view that knowledge of individuals is not possible to see individual est ineffabile ). In addition to explanations, clarify the scope of an individual concept. Some philosophers, among others, Duns Scotus have it, " This wholes " or individual beings introduced so-called haecceitates to be by means of which also explains which ever individuals and their terms are constituted ( " individuation ").

Generic term / narrower term

Depending on how closely a term is defined, it can include very similar or very different objects. By objects that fall under a concept, are classified according to additional features, sub-concepts are formed. The broader term is the generic term (example: " term" is the generic term for " general concept " and " individual concept ". ). From this it is already that each preamble is a general term, but a general term can also be narrower term. An individual concept, however, can only be sub- term, even if the corresponding object or individual may fall under several headings. (Example: P. and his dog Waldi Waldi Then hang together very fall under the generic terms dog and friend, but is an element of the intersection and ' non- preamble ' of dog and friend.. )

Generic term / concept of species

Some idea can be formed " described as a set of various features ." These features show their relations to other concepts. Key features of a concept are the genus-specific feature and the difference in kind. Genus ( sbegriff ) ( genus) is the " term in relation to another, in whose contents he appears as the main part, a larger circumference " and type ( concept ) of " term with respect to the other, in its content occurs as the main body, has a smaller circumference. "

See also: Defining and linguistic aspects genus name

Concrete / abstract concepts

In philosophy, various objections to this classification are collected, among other things, because all concepts are formed by abstraction and generalization. To that extent, the concrete concept is a result of abstraction. To maintain the subdivision and to adopt more stringent, it has been tried it due to different methodological types of abstraction. As needed to be distinguished in some way, the image of an object and the image characteristics of an object. This distinction leads then to classify the concepts into concrete and abstract.

A concrete term is a term that is " the definition of individual objects ( of a kind) or use an assertion about any of similar objects " can (examples: horse, human, house). As a concrete term, in contrast to the abstract concept, a certain given subject or a particular class of objects is called: eg Hotel, Berlin, environment, apple.

An abstract concept is " to define a property of objects or a relation between individual objects or represent " a term that is needed examples are: courage, red, love, hate, human dignity. He is not called representational entities, such as freedom, spirit, being, and representational entities, such as nature, matter, thing, life, etc.

Compatible / incompatible terms

Following the ratio of the extension and intension of terms can organize them into compatible and incompatible terms. Compatibility are two terms that have such features in their content, their scope may coincide in whole or in part. Terms that are coextensive, hot equipollent ( evening star / morning star ). In addition, there may be terms that are with regard to the scope partially cut (example: water animal / mammal). Terms can also be the relative over-and subordination. The parent term then acts as a generic, the child as a species concept (example: creatures / human). Furthermore, a distinction is jointly have (example: monkey / human - beings ) also coordinated terms, ie terms that have no extension, but a generic feature. In the incompatible notions can be adversarial terms, contradictory terms (eg: white / non- white), contrasting terms that are subordinate to a third term, but in contrast to adversarial terms are not complementary to each other, as well as disparate terms that its scope exclude one after the other, while no common related generic term have (eg: soul / delta), differ from each other.

Concept acquisition and concept formation

The term theory discussed since its historical beginnings, the origin of concepts and in particular the question of whether all or some of the terms " innate " are ( Begriffs-Innativismus/-nativismus ) or all or almost all the concepts acquired through personal contribution of the knower be ( concept - empiricism ). After Hans Aebli the initial term finding goes in the form zuordnender viewing with conjunction and correlation over the conceptualization of complex system -like linking and categorization.

Concept formation is a psychological process that leads to the categorization of objects or events. The classification is based on the common features of the objects. It is assumed that the characteristics can be distinguished from the insignificant. It is associated with the field of the psychology of thinking, but also falls because this is a learning process, in the psychology of learning. The process of concept formation is often attributed to the following mechanisms:

Jean Piaget has dealt with the concept formation of man in the form of a structural analysis of the available to him already standing cognitive structures and the environment. According to him cognitive structures form by interacting with the objects. Old structures are maintained for as long can be assigned to new invariant features and thus lead to a correction. In the first case, the object of perception is adapted Piaget calls this assimilation. In the latter case, the perception adapts to the object, it is called the accommodation. There is a steady state, which he calls equilibration between these processes. The perception and, consequently, the ability to form new concepts, thus differentiates itself from more and more.

Quotes

" Since the human language than the reason peculiar name means, it is an idle idea to look for a less perfect presentation and want to torment them. The term can be interpreted as such significantly only with the spirit of whose property is not only, but pure self he. It is vain to want him to hold through space figures and algebraic signs for Behufe of the external eye and a non-conceptual, mechanical treatment way of a calculus. Also, each other, which should serve as a symbol, can be at most as symbols for the nature of God, premonitions and echoes of the term excite; but if there should be serious to express the concept thereby and to recognize, the external nature of all symbols is inappropriate to it, and rather the ratio is reversed, that what appeal of a higher destiny in the symbols identified only through the term and that sensual Beiwesens can be approached him solely by the secretion, which should express it "

25691