Roman Ingarden’s Objectivity vs. Subjectivity as a problem of Translatability

Show simple item record

dc.contributor University of Helsinki, Department of Philosophy, History, Culture and Art Studies 2010-2017 en
dc.contributor.author Pareyon, Gabriel
dc.contributor.editor Tarasti, Eero
dc.date.accessioned 2011-02-02T10:41:01Z
dc.date.available 2011-02-02T10:41:01Z
dc.date.issued 2010-06-07
dc.identifier.citation Pareyon , G 2010 , Roman Ingarden’s Objectivity vs. Subjectivity as a problem of Translatability . in E Tarasti (ed.) , Abstracts of the International Summer School for Semiotic and Structural Studies : 25 Years Semiotics in Imatra . International Summer School for Semiotic and Structural Studies , pp. 34-35 , 25 Years Semiotics in Imatra , Imatra , Finland , 11/06/2010 . en
dc.identifier.citation conference en
dc.identifier.other PURE: 11207516
dc.identifier.other PURE UUID: 88031094-2847-4c58-a5f7-c2746ac07a04
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10138/24790
dc.description.abstract Ingarden (1962, 1964) postulates that artworks exist in an “Objective purely intentional” way. According to this view, objectivity and subjectivity are opposed forms of existence, parallel to the opposition between realism and idealism. Using arguments of cognitive science, experimental psychology, and semiotics, this lecture proposes that, particularly in the aesthetic phenomena, realism and idealism are not pure oppositions; rather they are aspects of a single process of cognition in different strata. Furthermore, the concept of realism can be conceived as an empirical extreme of idealism, and the concept of idealism can be conceived as a pre-operative extreme of realism. Both kind of systems of knowledge are mutually associated by a synecdoche, performing major tasks of mental order and categorisation. This contribution suggests that the supposed opposition between objectivity and subjectivity, raises, first of all, a problem of translatability, more than a problem of existential categories. Synecdoche seems to be a very basic transaction of the mind, establishing ontologies (in the more Ingardean way of the term). Wegrzecki (1994, 220) defines ontology as “the central domain of philosophy to which other its parts directly or indirectly refer”. Thus, ontology operates within philosophy as the synecdoche does within language, pointing the sense of the general into the particular and/or viceversa. The many affinities and similarities between different sign systems, like those found across the interrelationships of the arts, are embedded into a transversal, synecdochic intersemiosis. An important question, from this view, is whether Ingardean’s pure objectivities lie basically on the impossibility of translation, therefore being absolute self-referential constructions. In such a case, it would be impossible to translate pure intentionality into something else, like acts or products. en
dc.format.extent 2
dc.language.iso eng
dc.publisher International Summer School for Semiotic and Structural Studies
dc.relation.ispartof Abstracts of the International Summer School for Semiotic and Structural Studies 25 Years Semiotics in Imatra
dc.rights en
dc.subject 613 Arts en
dc.subject intentionality en
dc.subject objectivity en
dc.subject subjectivity en
dc.subject intersemiosis en
dc.subject Ingardean philosophy en
dc.title Roman Ingarden’s Objectivity vs. Subjectivity as a problem of Translatability en
dc.type Conference contribution
dc.type.uri info:eu-repo/semantics/other
dc.contributor.pbl

Files in this item

Total number of downloads: Loading...

Files Size Format View
Roman_Ingarden.pdf 109.5Kb PDF View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record