scholarly journals ПРОПОЗИЦИОНАЛЬНЫЕ УСТАНОВКИ В КОНТЕКСТЕ СИТУАЦИИ ЗНАКОМСТВА

Author(s):  
Maria Shkabrova

The emergence and development of the semantic theory of aquaintaince is associated with the solution of conceptual confusion within the context of propositional attitudes. The author considers various contexts of propositional attitudes, such as desire, taste, belief, knowledge, resorting to the consideration of difficulties that arise in their environment. There is also attempting to explain problems and ambiguities using information theory and cognitive process analysis. С решением концептуального замешательства в рамках контекстов пропозициональных установок связано появление и развитие семантической теории знакомства. Автор работы рассматривает различные контексты пропозициональных установок, такие как желание, вкус, убеждение, прибегая к обзору формальных трудностей, возникающих в их среде. Также предпринимается попытка объяснения проблем и неоднозначностей с помощью теории информации и анализа когнитивных процессов.

Author(s):  
Brian D. Ehret ◽  
Wayne D. Gray ◽  
Susan S. Kirschenbaum

A cognitive process analysis and modeling approach to task analysis is described in the context of Project Nemo, a research effort aimed at explicating situation assessment behavior in commanders of nuclear powered attack submarines. The approach is structured around the rationality and problem space principles outlined in Card, Moran and Newell (1983). The process analysis phases involve characterizing the task domain as well as the subject's goals, operators, and knowledge. The modeling phases involves instantiating the elements from the process analysis phases into a runnable computational cognitive model. The behavior of this model is then judged against a standard, such as expert judgment or the commander's behavior, in order to evaluate the sufficiency of the cognitive process analysis. Unlike conventional task analysis methods, this approach enables the analyst not only to describe task behavior at a detailed cognitive process level, but to evaluate the precision of that description.


2001 ◽  
Vol 29 (8) ◽  
pp. 777-785 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evelyne Fouquereau ◽  
Anne Fernandez ◽  
Etienne Mullet

The objective was to study ordinary people's judgments, through the use of external indices, of the expected degree of retirement satisfaction and to characterize the cognitive process involved in making these judgments. The method used was an application of Integration Information Theory (IIT). The total sample was formed of two subsamples of 50 workers and 53 recently retired people. The main results showed that the overall degree of retirement satisfaction and the factors taken into account in the judgment process are surprisingly similar in both groups. There was also no fundamental difference in integration patterns between workers and retirees. All participants used an additive rule.


2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (12) ◽  
pp. 12068-12072
Author(s):  
Wasis ◽  
Sukarmin ◽  
Muji Sri Prastiwi

Philosophy ◽  
1998 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. M. S. HACKER

1. Belief and mental statesDavidson holds that intentional verbs occurring in the form ‘A Vs that p’ signify propositional attitudes. These are, he claims, (i) mental states (MS 160; KOM passim), and (ii) dispositions (FPA 103). Davidson does not conceive of himself as introducing a special technical sense of the common intentional verbs. He insists that ‘the mental states in question are beliefs, desires, intentions, and so on, as ordinarily conceived' (KOM 51f.). Consequently he contends that believing that p is a mental state, disposition or dispositional state. These ontological claims about the nature of belief inform his account of the logical form of belief sentences. I shall address the question of whether believing that p can justly be deemed a mental state, a disposition or dispositional state. Subsequently I shall examine Davidson's account of the logical form of belief sentences.Our concept of a mental state, like so many of the concepts which philosophers treat as categorial, is none too sharply defined. It has a respectable use, which can be described. But, like other such general psychological terms, e.g. ‘mental process’, ‘mental activity’, far from being the ‘hardest of the hard’ - a sharply circumscribed categorial term akin to a variable in a well-constructed formal system — it has blurred boundaries and is elastic. Like all our ordinary psychological concepts, it evolved in order to meet everyday needs. As Wittgenstein observed, ‘The concepts of psychology are just everyday concepts. They are not concepts newly fashioned by science for its own purposes, as are the concepts of physics and chemistry.’Although our ordinary concepts can be replaced by technical ones for specialized purposes, they cannot be abused without generating conceptual confusion and incoherence. If the expression ‘mental state’ is being employed in its ordinary sense, then it is wrong to hold that believing that p is to be in any mental state. If it is being employed in a special technical sense, then those who employ it thus owe us an account of what it means and how it is to be used. This Davidson and the many other philosophers who subscribe to the view that believing is a mental state have not done. Until such an account is forthcoming, one may presume that they think of themselves as deploying our ordinary concept of a mental state. And if so, I shall argue, they are misusing it.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-138
Author(s):  
Luis Niel

The aim of this article is to analyze and criticize Roderick Chisholm’s conception of intentionality, which has, historically, served as the point of departure for most accounts of intentionality in analytic philosophy. My goal is to highlight the problematic ‘logico-linguistic commitment’ presupposed by Chisholm, according to which mental concepts should be interpreted by means of semantic concepts. After addressing Chisholm’s differentiation between the ontological thesis (the idea that the intentional object might not exist) and the psychological thesis (the conception that only mental phenomena are intentional), as well as his defining criteria for intentionality (non-existential implication, independency of truth-value, and indirect reference), I focus on the manifold problems presented by his theory. First, the two initial criteria entail a conceptual confusion between the semantic concept of ‘intensionality’ and the mental concept of ‘intentionality’. Second, according to these criteria””and against Chisholm’s explicit intention””perception and other cognitive activities should not be considered intentional. Third, there are no grounds for the artificial conflation of intentionality and the concept of ‘propositional attitudes’””an equation which is an explicit tenet of the logico-linguistic commitment. In general, I argue that an interpretation of intentionality based on this commitment obscures the true meaning of the concept of intentionality, as it is presented, for instance, by phenomenology.


2020 ◽  
pp. 81-93

There are morphological, syntactic, semantic, accentic aspects of layout in the language corpus. The corpus is the most convenient means of observing the language fluctuation of the dictionary (neologism, istorism, archaism) and its material must be linguistically processed. The complex of tags is the main tool for the implementation of this linguistic process (analysis). By monitoring the surroundings of this or that linguistic unit, it is possible to identify certain semantic characters that characterize this unity. The word may refer to a few semantic categories simultaneously, so it is important to consider the level of the word or the category of the word. The rank is determined by counting the distribution frequency according to different categories. Thus, by means of a corpus it is possible to find out the semantic category of words and to get acquainted with the meaning of each category. A set of semantic tags should be perfectly designed so that the body can indicate which semantic category it belongs to. This article discusses the significance of semantic groups, colonies and domains in the development of a set of semantic labels. The set of semantic tags is based on the semantic field, semantic colon, and LSG. On the first page of the interface semantic fields of the Uzbek language are given, if a semantic field is selected, the second window opens, the semantic groups of the same area appear, semantic gangs are again separated from the LSG. This structure of the interface works on the basis of the analysis of “analyze the word” principle. At the stage of morphological markup for the horse horoscope, the semantic area affiliation also refers to an explanation of how the LMG enters the label. The use of the semantic theory of the body in the case of a corpus can also be the basis for the ideological arc of the body.


2000 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 223-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Spencer

This paper seeks to reassess the contributions made by Braverman and subsequent labour process writers to the critique of capitalist production. Braverman's main motivation lay with the subversion of pro-capitalist ideologies. He identified deskilling tendencies with the capitalist imperative of accumulation in order to promote the case for revolutionary change. The labour process debate that Braverman helped to initiate, while successful in broadening understanding of concrete work relations, has difficulties in excavating the necessary interconnections of capitalist alienation and exploitation. In particular, there is a problem in separating out the different levels of analysis that link essence and appearance in the work context. Narrow focus on the labour process creates unnecessary conceptual confusion about the specificity of capitalist production, and also condones an unduly pessimistic political agenda on the prospects for transcending capitalist domination. In eschewing the important interconnections between workplace organisation and capitalist social relations, labour process analysis risks inverting the critical intent of Braverman's Labor and Monopoly Capital by promoting the continuation of the extant social order.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document