On analogical arguments: Organizing logical and conceptual problems in sections 18 and 19 of Schopenhauer´s The World as Will and Representation

Here I list and organize some logical and conceptual problems in Section 18 (about the cognoscibility of the thing in itself) and Section 19 (about the extension of this result to the world) in Schopenhauer´s main work. When Schopenhauer put out the analogical argument for the responsibility for tra...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Marcos Silva
Format: Article
Language:Portuguese
Published: Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM) 2011-12-01
Series:Voluntas
Subjects:
Online Access:https://periodicos.ufsm.br/voluntas/article/view/34129
id doaj-e91fb9e237f14d808de9173ecc041f2e
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e91fb9e237f14d808de9173ecc041f2e2020-11-25T03:21:45ZporUniversidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM) Voluntas2179-37862011-12-012218521510.5902/217937863412915141On analogical arguments: Organizing logical and conceptual problems in sections 18 and 19 of Schopenhauer´s The World as Will and RepresentationMarcos Silva0Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJHere I list and organize some logical and conceptual problems in Section 18 (about the cognoscibility of the thing in itself) and Section 19 (about the extension of this result to the world) in Schopenhauer´s main work. When Schopenhauer put out the analogical argument for the responsibility for transmitting (übertragen) the problematic identification thing in itself/will, he brought to his philosophy the following fragile points of such an argument: (i) the logical invalidity; (ii) the lack of criterion for the extension scope; (iii) the indeterminacy of what is really being extended; (iv) the unrestricted character of his analogical extension; (v) the indirect nature of his argument (for avoiding the solipsism); and (vi) the collapse of what is being extended. I then try to point out why - despite these logical fragile points - the analogical argument seems not to be problematic at all to Schopenhauer.https://periodicos.ufsm.br/voluntas/article/view/34129Argumentos por analogia, solipsismo, coisa-em-si
collection DOAJ
language Portuguese
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Marcos Silva
spellingShingle Marcos Silva
On analogical arguments: Organizing logical and conceptual problems in sections 18 and 19 of Schopenhauer´s The World as Will and Representation
Voluntas
Argumentos por analogia, solipsismo, coisa-em-si
author_facet Marcos Silva
author_sort Marcos Silva
title On analogical arguments: Organizing logical and conceptual problems in sections 18 and 19 of Schopenhauer´s The World as Will and Representation
title_short On analogical arguments: Organizing logical and conceptual problems in sections 18 and 19 of Schopenhauer´s The World as Will and Representation
title_full On analogical arguments: Organizing logical and conceptual problems in sections 18 and 19 of Schopenhauer´s The World as Will and Representation
title_fullStr On analogical arguments: Organizing logical and conceptual problems in sections 18 and 19 of Schopenhauer´s The World as Will and Representation
title_full_unstemmed On analogical arguments: Organizing logical and conceptual problems in sections 18 and 19 of Schopenhauer´s The World as Will and Representation
title_sort on analogical arguments: organizing logical and conceptual problems in sections 18 and 19 of schopenhauer´s the world as will and representation
publisher Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)
series Voluntas
issn 2179-3786
publishDate 2011-12-01
description Here I list and organize some logical and conceptual problems in Section 18 (about the cognoscibility of the thing in itself) and Section 19 (about the extension of this result to the world) in Schopenhauer´s main work. When Schopenhauer put out the analogical argument for the responsibility for transmitting (übertragen) the problematic identification thing in itself/will, he brought to his philosophy the following fragile points of such an argument: (i) the logical invalidity; (ii) the lack of criterion for the extension scope; (iii) the indeterminacy of what is really being extended; (iv) the unrestricted character of his analogical extension; (v) the indirect nature of his argument (for avoiding the solipsism); and (vi) the collapse of what is being extended. I then try to point out why - despite these logical fragile points - the analogical argument seems not to be problematic at all to Schopenhauer.
topic Argumentos por analogia, solipsismo, coisa-em-si
url https://periodicos.ufsm.br/voluntas/article/view/34129
work_keys_str_mv AT marcossilva onanalogicalargumentsorganizinglogicalandconceptualproblemsinsections18and19ofschopenhauerstheworldaswillandrepresentation
_version_ 1724612643475423232