Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 59 items :

  • "Mode of Validation" x
Clear All

Zusammenfassung

Ausgehend von der Aktualität des ‚practical turns‘ in der soziologischen Diskussion fragt der Beitrag nach der Bestimmung von Praxis als symbolischer Praxis. Dazu werden erstens anhand der Sozialtheorien von Mannheim und Searle drei übereinstimmende Grundannahmen sondiert und als Kern einer Theorie der symbolischen Praxis herausgearbeitet. Mit Aussagen aus der Theorie symbolischer Praxis Bourdieus werden zweitens in Bezug auf die drei Grundannahmen sowohl Konvergenzen aufgezeigt als auch strukturtheoretischer Ergänzungsbedarf reklamiert. Demgegenüber zeigt Davidsons Bedeutungstheorie Prämissen, die sich in sozial- und prozesstheoretischer Hinsicht deutlich von Mannheim und Searle sowie von Bourdieu abheben. Vergleichend werden die drei rekonstruierten Ansätze als divergente Abzweigungsmöglichkeiten einer Theorie symbolischer Praxis ausgewiesen. Gleichwohl wird abschließend für eine Behebung der Unverträglichkeiten der Ansätze und insbesondere für eine Integration sowohl der strukturtheoretischen Ansprüche Bourdieus als auch des prozesstheoretischen Anliegens Davidsons plädiert, indem auf Problemstellungen innerhalb einer Theorie symbolischer Praxis hingewiesen wird, für deren Klärung sie fruchtbar gemacht werden könnten.

FREE ACCESS

of the Evaluation Measure 107 3.3.2.4.3. Conditions of Adequacy for the Evaluation Measure 108 3.3.2.4.4. The Notion 'Degree of Lin- guistically Significant Generalization' 110 3.4. Summary of Conclusions 113 4. The Validation of Transformational Generative Pho- nology as a Mentalistic Theory 116 4.1. General Remarks 116 4.2. The Thesis of Mentalism 117 4.3. The Validation of Mentalistic Hypotheses 121 4.3.1. Introductory Remarks 121 4.3.2. Norms for Validating Empirical Theories 122 4.3.3. Modes of Validating Mentalistic Hypotheses 124 4

The Categorical Imperative, p. 221; and Williams, The Concept of the Categorical Imperative, pp.30 and 34. Kand and the Price of a Justification 289 principles. The difference between the two kinds of criteria has nothing to do with posi- tive or negative, but with the mode of validating a principle: a criterion of rectitude can do so simply and directly; a criterion of realm must use a method of exclusion - the focus of the argument must be on discrediting alternative principles. Now for Kant. I want to begin with a passage in which he describes how he would at

which different modes of validating-consciousness and verifying synthesis can be actualized in correspondence to their proper objects and can arrange different forms of harmonious unities of manifolds . That said, reason does not ‘emerge’ from an a-rational or pre-rational constitutive ground. Reason ‘co-exists,’ so to speak, with what is constituted in and through intentional operations in consciousness. It is a telos that performs a regulating function in the flow of consciousness. Reason is the teleological ‘rule’ (Regel) that strictly regulates the formation

affairs is possible while with a practical transcendental deduction we deal with the conditions requi- site for the pursuit of a certain end to be efficiently and effectively practicable. And so, the authentication of ideas looks not to a theoretical and objective but rather to a pragmatic mode of validation, seeing that ideas to not represent experi- ential objects but procedural functions: The ultimate aim to which the speculation of reason in its transcendental employment is directed concerns three objects: the freedom of the will, the immortality of the soul, and

thyroid- stimulating-hormone (TSH). The methods that were intended for routine use were investigated for their analytical performance characteristics and mode of validation. Results. Mass spectrometric assays for routine analysis have been described for testosterone (5), estradiol (1), thyroxine (total and free) (1), and triiodothyronine (1). All provide basic method validation data (imprecision, linearity, recovery, limit of detection), however, only few provide method comparison data with higher-order reference measurement procedures or analysis of certified reference

commu- nication with respect to the objectively real. Accordingly, what we have here is an object-level realism that rests on a presuppositional idealism at the justificatory infralevel. We thus arrive at a realism that is founded on a fundamentally idealistic basis. In sum, paradoxical though it may seem, we obtain a realism whose justifactory basis is thoroughly idealistic in its mode of validation.4 Now, if realism ultimately stands on this basis, then it is clear that we have a realism whose rationale is ideal. It clearly does not rest on substantive

, I have long felt that the similar goals and mental styles overwhelm the legitimate differ- ences in materials for study and modes of validation. The commonalities of creative thinking, and the psychology of mental drive and excitement, seem to transcend the logical differences of subject or approach. (I would not try to distinguish the emotions of exaltation felt in singing a particularly moving passage in Bach’s Passion settings from the excitement of solving a tough little puzzle in the systematics of Cerion [the land snail of my personal research], and saying

it. IT is self-supportive and thus is exactly what a thor- oughly rational mode of validation should be. For where rational- ity is involved, self-supportingness is a good thing and circularity is not only unproblematic but desirable. Who would want a de- 8 fense of reason that is not itself reasonable? Reason and rational- ity not only can but must be called upon to speak upon their own behalf. Thus insofar as inquiry into the nature of the real is a matter of truth esti- mation, the process at issue is and must be one that enjoys reason’s “Good Housekeeping

the affixing of our Great Seal.”16 In addition to the Great Seal, then, Richard’s charter also bears a notarial sign and attestation. With this, the chan- cery has merged an English confirmation document into a hybrid record, imbricating the different practices of author and recipient, and the impressed and inscribed image as modes of validation. Below the main text of the document, in darker ink, is the notarial mark and attestation of John de Bouland (Figure 9.7). He is the same notary whose mark Figure 9.4. Detail of Figure 9.1: notarial mark. 16 “In cuius