카테고리 없음

호의의 원칙, 자비의 원칙 principle of charity

VIS VITALIS 2016. 10. 8. 11:37
  • 개인적으로 "선의의 원칙"을 세우고 그 타당성을 검토 중인 시기라고 할 수 있다.
    자신의 가족이나 지인들에 대해 기본적으로 기분나쁜 일이 있더라도 좋게 해석하자는 것이다.

    좋은 게 좋다는 말의 적용범위를 개인적으로 국한한 셈이다.

    그러다 principle of charity를 보니 반갑다.




    Principle of charity 
    위키백과
    In philosophy and rhetoric, the principle of charity requires interpreting a speaker's statements to be rational and, in the case of any argument, considering its best, strongest... 더보기
  • 논증의 재구성 
    (관련어도움말 principle of charity)
     
    논증 사회과학 > 미디어백과
    이처럼 논증을 재구성할 때 재구성자가 갖추어야 할 태도에 따르는 원칙을 ‘자비의 원칙(principle of charity)’이라고 한다. ‘자비의 원칙’에 따를 때 논증의 재구성이 지향해야 할 일차적 목표는 논자가... 더보기




Principle of charity

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In philosophy and rhetoric, the principle of charity requires interpreting a speaker's statements to be rational and, in the case of any argument, considering its best, strongest possible interpretation.[1] In its narrowest sense, the goal of this methodological principle is to avoid attributing irrationality, logical fallacies or falsehoods to the others' statements, when a coherent, rational interpretation of the statements is available. According to Simon Blackburn[2] "it constrains the interpreter to maximize the truth or rationality in the subject's sayings."

Neil L. Wilson gave the principle its name in 1958–59. Its main area of application, by his lights, is determining the referent of a proper name:

How should we set about discovering the significance which a person attaches to a given name? […] Let us suppose that somebody (whom I am calling "Charles") makes just the following five assertions containing the name "Caesar." […]

(1) Caesar conquered Gaul. (Gc)
(2) Caesar crossed the Rubicon. (Rc)
(3) Caesar was murdered on the Ides of March. (Mc)
(4) Caesar was addicted to the use of the ablative absolute. (Ac)
(5) Caesar was married to Boadicea. (Bc)

[…] And so we act on what might be called the Principle of Charity. We select as designatum that individual which will make the largest possible number of Charles' statements true. […] We might say the designatum is that individual which satisfies more of the asserted matrices containing the word "Caesar" than does any other individual.[3]

Willard Van Orman Quine and Donald Davidson[4] provide other formulations of the principle of charity. Davidson sometimes referred to it as the principle of rational accommodation. He summarized it: We make maximum sense of the words and thoughts of others when we interpret in a way that optimises agreement. The principle may be invoked to make sense of a speaker's utterances when one is unsure of their meaning. In particular, Quine's use of the principle gives it this latter, wide domain.

Since the time of Quine et al., other philosophers[who?] have formulated at least four versions of the principle of charity. These alternatives may conflict with one another, so which principle to use may depend on the goal of the conversation. The four principles are:

  1. The other uses words in the ordinary way;
  2. The other makes true statements;
  3. The other makes valid arguments;
  4. The other says something interesting.

A related principle is the principle of humanity, which states that we must assume that another speaker's beliefs and desires are connected to each other and to reality in some way, and attribute to him or her "the propositional attitudes one supposes one would have oneself in those circumstances" (Daniel Dennett, "Mid-Term Examination," in The Intentional Stance, p. 343).

See also[edit]

Footnotes[edit]

  1. Jump up^ Normand Baillargeon: Intellectual Self-Defense. Seven Stories Press 2007, p. 78
  2. Jump up^ Blackburn, Simon (1994). The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 62.
  3. Jump up^ Neil L. Wilson (June 1959). "Substances without Substrata". The Review of Metaphysics. 12 (4): 521–539. JSTOR 20123725.
  4. Jump up^ Davidson, Donald (1984) [1974]. "Ch. 13: on the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme". Inquiries into Truth and Interpretation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

External links[edit]






















저작자표시 비영리 변경금지