On abduction and interpretation

  1. Antonio Duarte 1
  1. 1 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

Revue:
Crítica: revista hispanoamericana de filosofía

ISSN: 0011-1503

Année de publication: 2019

Volumen: 51

Número: 151

Pages: 65-84

Type: Article

DOI: 10.22201/IIFS.18704905E.2019.03 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAccès ouvert editor

D'autres publications dans: Crítica: revista hispanoamericana de filosofía

Résumé

En este artículo me centraré en desviaciones intencionales del uso or- dinario del lenguaje desde una perspectiva en la que la abducción desempeña un papel necesario. En estos casos, el hablante profiere unas palabras “misteriosas” basándose en la capacidad abductiva del interlocutor. Con el fin de causar el efecto deseado, el hablante se apoya en el conocimiento, por parte del oyente, del marco dialógico compartido y utiliza su proferencia como un detonador abductivo. Con fines explicativos, presentaré un curioso tipo de (pseudo)falacia: la (pseudo)falacia irónica.

Références bibliographiques

  • Aliseda, A., 2006, Abductive Reasoning. Logical Investigations into Dis- covery and Explanation, Springer, Dordrecht.
  • Anderson, D.R., 2005, “The Esthetic Attitude of Abduction”, Semiotica, vol. 153, no. 1, pp. 9–22.
  • ––——, 1986, “The Evolution of Peirce’s Concept of Abduction”, Transac- tions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 145–164.
  • Arrighi, C. and R. Ferrario, 2008, “Abductive Reasoning, Interpretation and Collaborative Processes”, Foundations of Science, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 75–87.
  • Barés Gómez, C. and M. Fontaine, 2017, “Argumentation and Abduction in Dialogical Logic”, in L. Magnani and T. Bertolotti (eds.), Handbook of Model-Base Science, Springer, Cham.
  • Chiasson, P., 2001, Logica Utens [retrieved: 30/05/2019].
  • Davidson, D., 2006, “A Nice Derangement of Epitaphs”, in The Essential Davidson, Oxford University Press, New York.
  • Douven, I., 2011, “Abduction”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2011 Edition) in E.N. Zalta (ed.) [retrieved: 30/05/2019].
  • Doyle, A.C., 2009, The Case Book of Sherlock Holmes, eBooks@Adelaide, The University of Adelaide [retrieved: 30/05/2019].
  • Duarte, A., 2018, “Abducción y logica docens”, Revista de Filosofía, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 27–47.
  • ––——, 2015, “Abducción y diálogo persuasivo: Elemental, querido Peirce”, Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentación, vol. 11, pp. 1–33.
  • Eco, U. and T.A. Sebeok (eds.), 1988, The Sign of Three: Dupin, Holmes, Peirce, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.
  • Fann, K.T., 1970, Peirce’s Theory of Abduction, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague.
  • Gabbay, D.M. and J. Woods, 2005, The Reach of Abduction. Insight and Trial, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
  • García-Carpintero, M., 2008, Las palabras, las ideas y las cosas, Ariel, Barcelona.
  • Grice, H.P., 1975, “Logic and Conversation”, in P. Cole and J.L. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, Academic Press, New York, pp. 41–58.
  • Hintikka, J., 1998, “What Is Abduction? The Fundamental Problem of Contemporary Epistemology”, Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 503–533.
  • Macagno, F. and D. Walton, 2013, “Implicatures as Forms of Argument”, in A. Capone, F. Lo Piparo and M. Carapezza (eds.), Perspectives on Pragmatics and Philosophy, Springer, Berlin, New York, pp. 203–224.
  • Magnani, L., 2009, “Abductive Cognition. The Epistemological and Eco- Cognitive Dimensions of Hypothetical Reasoning”, in R. Dillmann, Y. Nakamura, S. Schaal, and D. Vernon, (eds.), Cognitive Systems Monographs, vol. 3, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
  • ––——, 2001, Abduction, Reason and Science. Processes of Discovery and Explanation, Kluwer Academic, Plenum Publishers, New York.
  • Niño, D., 2007, Abducting Abduction. Avatares sobre la comprensión de la Abducción de Charles S. Peirce, PhD dissertation, Universidad Nacional de Colombia.
  • Paavola, S., 2004, “Abduction as a Logic and Methodology of Discovery: The Importance of Strategies”, Foundations of Science, vol. 9, pp. 267– 283.
  • Peirce, C.S., 1931-1958, Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, vols. 1–8, ed. P. Weiss, C. Hartshorne, and A.W. Burks, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. [CP].
  • Pietarinen, A.-V., 2005, “Cultivating habits of reason: Peirce and the logica utens versus logica docens distinction”, History of Philosophy Quarterly, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 357–372.
  • Van Eemeren, F.H., 2010, Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Dis- course, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam.
  • Van Eemeren, F.H. and R. Grootendorst, 1987, “Fallacies in Pragma- Dialectical Perspective”, Argumentation, vol. 1, pp. 283–301.
  • ––——, 1984, Speech Acts in Communicative Discussions, Foris, Dordrecht. Wagemans, J.H.M., 2014, “The Assessment of Argumentation Based on Abduction”, in D. Mohammed and M. Lewins ́ki (eds.), Virtues of Argumentation: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), 22–26 May 2013, OSSA, Windsor, ON.
  • Walton, D.N., 2004, Abductive Reasoning, The University of Alabama Press, Alabama.
  • Wirth, U., 2001, “Abductive Reasoning and Language Philosophy: Peirce’s and Davidson’s Account of Interpretation”, in M. Bergman and J. Queiroz (eds.), The Commens Encyclopedia: The Digital Encyclopedia of Peirce Studies. New Edition, Pub. 121220-1059a [retrieved: 30/05/2019].
  • Yu, S. and F. Zenker., 2017, “Peirce Knew Why Abduction Isn’t IBE. A Scheme and Critical Questions for Abductive Argument”, Argumenta- tion, vol. 32. no. 4, pp. 569–587.
La source de données: Dialnet