Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T20:24:59.381Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Deconstructing Reality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

Roland Fischer
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The word “real” (from the Latin “res” = thing) was coined in the 13th century to signify “having Properties” (Pierce. 1958, p. 358), whereas a “model” refers to an analogical representation, the structure of which should correspond to the structure or properties of that which it represents. For Scudder the mind is a system of models and each mind develops different models. We all have a different reality in mind and so we each live in a slightly different world (Scudder, 1975). Hence the real nature of the model and the model nature of reality are often indistinguishable. A snail, for example, when exposed to four tactile stimuli per second (with a rod on his belly) will be compelled to crawl upon that non-existing coherent spatial surface (Brecher, 1966). For the snail four tactile stimuli per second correspond to, or are isomorphic with, the structure of a spatial surface, but it is impossible for the snail to “know” which of the two structures is real.

Type
Research Article
Information
Diogenes , Volume 33 , Issue 129 , March 1985 , pp. 47 - 62
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 Fédération Internationale des Sociétés de Philosophie / International Federation of Philosophical Societies (FISP)

References

Banfield, A. (1982). Unspeakable Sentences. Boston, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Bateson, G., Jackson, D.D., Haley, J. AND Weakland, J. (1956)Behavioral Sciences 1, 251–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bett, H. (1925), Johannes Scotus Erigena. London, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Beyer, S. (1973). The Cult of Tara, Berkeley, SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
Blood, R. AND Weber, S. (1983). Modern Language Notes 98, 1327–1332.Google Scholar
Bohr, N. (1926). In Jammer, M. (1966). The Conceptual Development of Quantum Mechanics. New York, McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Brecher, G.A. (1932). Zeitschrift für Vergleichende Physiologie 18, 204. In Fischer, R. (1966). The Voices of Time. Fraser, J.T. Ed., New York, G. Braziller.Google Scholar
Burckhardt, S. (1968). Appendix in Shakespearean Meanings. Princeton, Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Chang, G.C.C. (1971). The Buddhist Teaching of Totality; The Philosophy of Hwa Yen Buddhism. University Park & London, The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Coreth, E. (1969). Grundlagen der Hermeneutik. Freiburg-Basel-Wien, Herder.Google Scholar
Culler, J. (1983). On Deconstruction, Theory and Criticism after Structuralism. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, Ltd.Google Scholar
De Man, P. (1980). Allegories of Reading. New Haven, Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Derrida, J. (1974). Of Grammatology. Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Doerfler, W. (1982). Medical Hypotheses 9, 563–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eddington, Sir A. (1958). The Philosophy of Physical Science. London, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, R. (1973), Forum (Amer. Soc. Cybernet.) 5, 1.Google Scholar
Fischer, R. (1976). Confinia Psychiatrica (Karger, Basel-New York) 19, 149–173. Fischer, R. (1979). Diogenes 108, 17–38.Google Scholar
Gasché, R. (1981). Diacritics 11, 36–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giese, W. (1952). Cahiers S. Puscariu 1, 137 ff. Reference 135 of Jakobson, R. in Style in Language (1960). Sebeok, T.A. (Ed.). New York, The Technology Press of MIT and Wiley.Google Scholar
Gordon, M. (1981). Diogenes 116, 70–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hegel, G.W.F. (1892). The Encyclopaedia of the Philosophical Sciences. Wallace, Wm. (Transl.). 2nd ed., Oxford, Clarendon.Google Scholar
Holländer, H. (1970). Westdeutsches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 33, 193–233.Google Scholar
Holton, G. (1973). Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought; Kepler to Einstein. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Jammer, M. (1974). The Philosophy of Quamum Mechanics. New York, Wiley.Google Scholar
Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1983). Mental Models. Cambridge, Mass., Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lacan, J. (1968). The Language of the Self. Wilden, A. (Transl.). Baltimore, The Johns Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laithwaite, E.R. (1977). Interdisciplinary Science Rev. 2, 100–108.Google Scholar
Locke, J. (first published 1690). (1975). Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Nidditch, P.H. (ed.). Oxford, Blackwell's.Google Scholar
Löfgren, L. (1981). In Autopoiesis, a Theory of Living Organization. Zeleny, M. (Ed.). New York, Oxford, Elsevier. North Holland Inc. (pp. 236–248).Google Scholar
Lupascu, S. (1941). L'Expérience microphysique et la pensée humaine. Paris, Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Marúyama, M. (1976). In Evolution and Consciousness. Jantsch, E. & Waddington, C.H. (Eds.). Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Norwich, K.E. (1983). Journ. Theor. Biol. 102. 175–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pankow, W. (1976). In Evolution and Consciousness. Jantsch, E. & Waddington, C.H. (Eds.). Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Pascal, B. (1963). Pensées, Le Mystère de Jésus, Brunschvicq, J. (Ed.). Paris, Pléiade, Editions du Seuil.Google Scholar
Peirce, Ch.S. (1958). Values in a Universe of Chance. Selected Writings. Wiener, Ph. P. (Ed.). Garden City, New York, Doubleday Anchor; (p. 358).Google Scholar
Platzeck, E.W. (1962). Raimund Lull. Sein Leben, seine Werke. Die Grundlagen seines Denkens (Prinzipienlehre). Bd. 1-2, Düsseldorf, Schwann.Google Scholar
Popper, K.R. (1946). Proceedings of the Aristotelean Society, Supplementary Volume 20, 41–60.Google Scholar
Powers, W.T. (1973). Behavior: The Control of Perception. Chicago, Aldine.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, L. (1945, 1961). Niels Bohr's Contribution to Epistemology. Amsterdam, North Holland.Google Scholar
Rorty, R. (1982). Synthèse 53, 323–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salam, A. (1981). In Scientific Explanation. Heath, A.F. (Ed.). Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Sampson, E.E. (1983). Journal of Mind & Behavior, 4, 135–164.Google Scholar
Schafer, R. (1981). In On Narrative. Mitchell, W.J.T. (Ed.). Chicago, The Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Scholes, R. and Kellogg, R. (1966). The Nature of Narrative. London and Oxford, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schrag, C.O. (1980). Radical Reflection and the Origin of the Human Sciences. West Lafayette, Indiana, Purdue Unviersity Press.Google Scholar
Scudder, C.L. (1975). Fields Within Fields 14, 49–58.Google Scholar
Spencer Brown, G. (1969). Laws of Form. London, Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Stent, G.S. (1981). Journal of Social & Biological Structuralism 4, 107–124. Thomas, R.E. (1963). Battelle Tecnical Rev. (Febr.) 11–19.Google Scholar
Thomas, , The Coptic Gospel according to Thomas (1968). In The Secret Sayings of the Living Jesus. Summers, R. (Ed.). Waco, Texas, Word Books.Google Scholar
Valéry, P. (1957-61). Les Cahiers du Paul Valéry. Paris, Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique. 29 Vols. in facsimile.Google Scholar
Wall, P.D. (1974). In Essays on the Nervous System. Bellairs, R. & Gray, E.G. (Eds.). Oxford, Clarendon.Google Scholar
Wheeler, J.A. (1977). Genesis and Observation. In Proc. 5th Intl. Congr. of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science. Butts, R.E. & Hintikka, J. (Eds.). Part 2. Boston, Reidel, pp. 3–33.Google Scholar
Wheeler, J.A. (1980). Beyond the Black Hole. In Some Strangeness in Proportion. Woolf, H. (Ed.). Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Yates, F.A. (1960). Journal of the Warburg & Courtauld Institutes 23, 1–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar