Intencionalidad original, pragmatismo y objetividad
Original Intentionality, Pragmatism and Objectivity:
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15446/ideasyvalores.v74n189.118156Palabras clave:
fenómenos intencionales, intencionalidad original, pragmatismo descriptivista, objetividad (es)intentional phenomena, original intentionality, descriptivist pragmatism, objectivity (en)
Descargas
Este texto propone que el debate sobre la normatividad semántica y la posesión de conceptos, desde un enfoque pragmatista descriptivo, permite profundizar en la intencionalidad original. Esta no debe asumirse, sino investigarse como fuente y autoridad epistémica de los criterios de corrección en el lenguaje y las prácticas sociales, fundamentales para la inteligibilidad y el sentido. A partir de este análisis, se argumenta que la normatividad que guía y justifica nuestras prácticas requiere criterios objetivos de corrección. Esto implica reconocer una co-determinación entre nuestras inclinaciones psicológicas —derivadas de una herencia biológico-social— y los objetos, así como la necesidad de una reflexividad particular como condición de posibilidad. En conjunto, se busca mostrar cómo esta perspectiva permite comprender mejor el papel de la normatividad en la constitución del sentido y la posibilidad de prácticas significativas.
In this text, I propose to show that the concern underlying the debate on semantic normativity and the possession of concepts, from a descriptive pragmatist approach, allows us to deepen and understand the importance of the phenomenon of original intentionality to the extent that it implies an inquiry, rather than a presupposition, about the source and epistemic authority of the criteria of correctness or normativity involved in the significant uses of language and social practices in general, which is fundamental to understanding the possibility of intelligibility and meaning. And based on this analysis, I argue that the possibility of a normativity that allows us to guide and justify our practices depends on accounting for objective criteria of correctness, which implies understanding a co-determination between our psychological inclinations (based on a biological-social inheritance) and objects, and the need for a particular type of reflexivity as a condition of possibility.
Referencias
Boghossian, Paul. “The Rule-Following Considerations.” Rule-Following and Meaning. Editado por Alexander Miller y Crispin Wright. Mcgill-Queen’s University Press, 2002.
Coulmas, Florian. Writing and Society. An Introduction. Cambridge University Press, 2013.
Dawkins, Richard. The Selfish Gene. Oxford University Press, 1976.
Dennett, Daniel. Darwin's Dangerous Idea. Evolution and the Meanings of Life. Simon & Shuster PaperbacksNew York 1995.
Dennett, Daniel. Intentional Stance. Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press, 1989.
Dennett, Daniel. “Who’s On First? Heterophenomenology Explained.” Journal of Consciousness Studies 10.9-10 (2003): 19-30 Tufts University, Medford
Goody, Jan. y Ian. Watt. “The Consequences of Literacy”. Comparative Studies in Society and History 5 (1963): 304-345Cambridge University Press.
Fodor, Jerry. “Introduction: The Persistence of Attitudes.” Psychosemantics MIT Press. Edited by Margaret Boden 1987.
Haugeland, John. “The Intentionality All-stars.” Having Thought. Essay in the Metaphysics of Mind, Harvard University Press, 1998.
Haugeland, John. “Objective Perception”. Having Thought. Essay in the Metaphysics of Mind, Harvard University Press, 1998.
Haugeland, John. “Authentic Intentionality.” Dasein Disclosed, Harvard University Press, 2013.
Kendal, Jeremy., Jamshid Tehrani, y John Odling-Smee. “Human niche construction in interdisciplinary focus.” Phil. Trans. Royal Society. B, 366 (2011): 785-792.
Kripke, Saul. Wittgenstein on Rules and Private Language. Harvard University Press, 1982.
Kusch, Martin. Sceptical Guide to Meaning and Rules. Defending Knipe’s Wittgenstein. Acumen Publishing Limited Mcgill-Queen's University Press 2006.
McDowell, John. “Wittgenstein on Following Rule.” Rule-Following and Meaning. Editado por Alexander Miller y Crispin Wright. Mcgill-Queen’s University Press, 2002.
Millikan, Ruth. “Truth Rules, Hoverflies, and the Kripke-Wittgenstein Paradox.” Rule-Following and Meaning. Editado por Alexander Miller y Crispin Wright. Mcgill-Queen’s University Press, 2002.
Mullins, Daniel, Harvey Whitehouse y Quentin D. Atkinson. “The Role of Writing and Recordkeeping in the Cultural Evolution of Human Cooperation.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 90 (2013): 141-151 University of Oxford
Odling Smee, John., Laland, Kevin.. y Feldman, Marcus. Niche Construction: The Neglected Process in Evolution. Princeton University Press, 2003.
Pippin, Robert. Hegel’s Idealism. The Satisfactions of Self-consciousness. Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Pippin, Robert. Hegel’s Realm of Shadows. Logic as Metaphysics in The Science of Logic. The University of Chicago Press, 2019.
Searle, John. “Intentionality and its Place in Nature.” Conciousness and Language, Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Searle, John. “Intentionality.” Mind. A Brief Introduction, Oxford University Press, 2004.
Sellars, Wilfrid. “Some Reflections on Language Games”. Philosophy of Science 21 (1954): 204-228 Cambridge University Press
Shoemaker, Sydeny. “The Royce Lectures. Self-knowledge and Inner Sense.” The First-Person Perspective and Other Essays. Cambridge University Press, 1996.
Sterelney, Kim. The Evolved Apprentice: How Evolution Made Humans Unique. The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts: London, England. 2012.
Tomasello, Michael. The Cultural Origins of Human Cognition. Harvard University Press, 1999.
Wilson, George. “Kripke on Wittgenstein on Normativity.” Rule-Following and Meaning. Editado por Alexander Miller y Crispin Wright. Mcgill-Queen’s University Press, 2002.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. Philosophical Investigations. Traducido por Elizabeth Anscombe Oxford: Basil Blackwell 1958.
Wright, Crispin. “Meaning and Intention as Judgement Dependent.” Rule-Following and Meaning. Editado por Alexander Miller y Crispin Wright. Mcgill-Queen’s University Press, 2002.
Zalabardo, José. “Kripke’s Normativity Argument.” Rule-Following and Meaning. Editado por Alexander Miller y Crispin Wright. Mcgill-Queen’s University Press, 2002.
Cómo citar
MODERN-LANGUAGE-ASSOCIATION
ACM
ACS
APA
ABNT
Chicago
Harvard
IEEE
Turabian
Vancouver
Descargar cita
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Los derechos son del autor(es), quien(es) puede re-publicar en parte o en su totalidad el documento ya publicado en la revista siempre y cuando se dé el debido reconocimiento a Ideas y Valores

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
De acuerdo con la Licencia Creative Commons Atribución-No Comercial-SinDerivar 4.0 Internacional. Se autoriza copiar, redistribuir el material en cualquier medio o formato, siempre y cuando se conceda el crédito a los autores de los textos y a Ideas y Valores como fuente de publicación original. No se permite el uso comercial de copia o distribución de contenidos, así como tampoco la adaptación, derivación o transformación alguna de estos sin la autorización previa de los autores y de la dirección de Ideas y Valores. Para mayor información sobre los términos de esta licencia puede consultar: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/legalcode.













