Elf is a metaphorI think *Eco Should Have Encountered The *should have ncountered the of Paul Ricoeur It would have been interesting to see a conjunction between the two of them Ricoeur is interested in the same things although as a philosopher of language a rhetorician he approaches the formulation from a position of narrative the root of which is metaphor The connection of two unlike things is what metaphor is and that generic connection can be what creates narrative though the The Structure of Soviet History: Essays and Documents excuse of temporal displacement in which multiplevents are strung together as one long thing a string of causation that is complete *only if it has all its partsBut that may be a *if it has all its partsBut that may be a Eco ventually nds up in the position of generic objects which gives us back to semiotics and signs From there he utilizes generic objects to set up identity and knowledge For this he could connect to Alain Badiou s work in set theory with the formulation of naked signs that are generic vents with their indiscernible aspect that allow them to be applied multiple times anywhere without losing their connection to Truth Once we get to this point though we are only talking about icons which are representations in themselves without actuality Their difference their next step down is the hypoicon which names the immediate first object without representation but only the sensory form itself which leaves us in limboPerhaps this is why Eco did not write a conclusion He had none He could only leave us to our imagination as to how to connect the two With the visual pun Mexican on a bicycle he leaves us to ponder the ambiguity of xperience that contextual changes or hypoiconic changes although different in type leads us with completely different understandings While he wants to connect semiotics to philosophy as an anterior buffering and semiotics to cognition as an internal marker of order to relate sense datum to signs he only at best manages a description Never can we understand that connection without first naming it And never can we name it without forcing it to become something other than what it might be otherwise a way of plugging parts together Not an Date Me easy task by any means for anyone to write about and Eco does a great job of hammering through what could have been far much denser textI suppose this is what we get for being creatures of language Language lets us model but it only lets us model generics When we subtract particularities from the object we get the generic but adding those particularities back gets us identities singletons which are uniue and yet a different object Mysterious that we canxtract type from tokens and then speak only in types when talking about tokens I forget where he says it but we speak in generics Comfort And Joy even if we mean individual singletons This is very much a root of racism or an issue with categorization of how we can know anything and the limits of what we know can be And yet often without really knowing we are still able to speak and negotiate and navigate to come to new understandings often without having to completely reconstruct the language we use at allThis ability is very much a kind of miracle I suppose then it is best that we can t find that missing piece that lets us connect the old to new or create new from old Lest if we did find it andxamine it we would nd up losing our very ability to create new narratives formulate new metaphors and ultimately give rise to new words We would in fact lose the ability to create new historyThis is very much the wonder I wish to look at and Eco gives us a great if somewhat long yet relatively simply written narrative for which to guide us about pondering this miracle 5 stars I only started it it was very interesting but very philosophy of language There s a great story in it about galileo coming to the americas and discovering the unicorn Upon writing back to his country he descries We were uite mistaken about the unicorn it is gray large and rather ugly Not horselike at all Turns out he had been introduced to the Rhino Description How we know that a cat is a cat is a nice philosophical poser and has been since the time of Plato Why we should all agree on calling the animal a cat is ually interesting yet it throws up the problem that lies at the heart of all modern philosophy how much do our perceptions of things depend on our cognitive ability and how much on our linguistic resourcesWhere and how do these two uestions meet Having decided against a systematic treatment of his subject Umberto Eco undertakes a series of idiosyncratic and typically brilliant Fitness for Geeks: Real Science, Great Nutrition, and Good Health explorations starting from the perceived data of common sense from which flow an abundance of stories or fables often with animals as protagonists toxpound a clear critiue of Kant Heidegger and Peirce And as a beast designed specifically to throw spanners in the works of cognitive theory the duckbilled platypus naturally takes centre stageThe demise of the author prompts me to take a tack through these. Essays Umberto Eco xplores in depth uestions of reality perception and xperience Basing his ideas on common sense Eco shares a vast wealth of literary and historical knowledge touchin. .
I am biased I love Umberto Eco This review is Therefore UselessEco Is Brilliant And Funny And A Million Times uselessEco is brilliant And funny And a million times than all of us I admit to having to slog through some parts due to my own ignorance of what he was discussing This is the kind of book that xemplifies why I commit the sin of writing in the margins in this case mainly uestion marks beside the passages with seemingly matter of fact points that I felt oblivious about and needed to google It was worth it though because when I finally did get the point I *Felt Just A Little Bit *just a little bit myself A difficult book sometimes I had to stop and look up words and xpressions unknown to me *THIS BOOK WAS THE MOST DIFFICULT *book was the most difficult Umberto Eco many books that I have read Essentially it is theoretical and conceptual Umberto Eco is undoubtedly a Genius and I would suggest a Savant His conceptualization of semiotics is very deep I sort of read the first bunch o pages of this book and didn t understand any of it and then realized that I don t know anything about philosophy or semiotics and then concluded that now was not the time to start learning Fortunately I got it for free from the Book Shed at the city dump hoooraaaaaay free dump books This book is hard to read Eco uses many languages long complex sentences and a peculiar strain of humor which combine to make a complex topic xtremely hard to understand But it also makes it highly readable Which is fortunate because I think this is a really important topic and this is the only book I ve read that addresses it directly If you make it all the way through you ll come away with a deeper understanding of how people come to understand things and how they communicate those things to other humans That might seem like common sense but this book is a great xample of how taking a philosophical approach to something that seems obvious can lead you to a deeper understanding I use what I learned The Game of Love ever day It s changed the way I approach people That s about all you can ask from a bookIf you read this and don t have a background in semiotics like myself my advice is to just run through it without stopping to look upver word you don t understand Let is wash over you and patterns will merge that make it clear what is going on It wont be asy but it will be rewarding Umberto Eco starts off in the first chapter with asking why is there something instead of nothing Although he references much philosophy in this first go around this is just a way for him to get to a interesting uestion he says that the fact that we can ask this uestion isn t to uestion Being itself but to uestion common sense that Being is the initial condition for common sense So let s get to what he really wants to ask Eco is really asking how can we know that something is what it is and not something lseAs a semiotician he is interesting in understanding why we get what we do and how we come to learn about new things This is not an asy task at all While he strings together the disparate discourses of philosophy piecean semiotics linguistics psychology and cognition in a complex and fascinating way he ventually comes to hinge his articulation on the figure of the sign as a mediating device He distinguishes between internal and shared xternal meanings and then The Lady in Pink extended intensivexpert modeling What makes Eco so impressive isn t the vast range at which he runs he also writes clearly and cleverly demonstrating that a specific formulation of how to get from A to B can have a multitude of pathways some of them contradictory but all consistent in their own logicThis can wrap around itself however as the articulation of new knowledge itself reuires the continual deferral of old knowledge in the place of new knowledge But knowledge isn t all that he is after because knowledge is only the Eyes expression of an internal understanding This is to say that he also creates new understanding in order to supply understanding to understanding itself So in a very reductive way he can t fullyxplain understanding xcept so much as to describe a possible path If we accept it internally then we can say that we understand it If we reject it we would claim it nonsensical or that we can t understand it While I am getting a little astray from Eco s formulation it is safe to say that Eco is best interested in trying to gasp the steps in formulation to get at any difference in deployment of any aspect of formulationIn a way I wish Eco had come up with a better conclusion He did say what he wanted to say but the crux of his discussion comes to us when we understand that the act of naming a difference is the creation of that spectrum Between two differences or between many discourses that may not connect that he connects if we are able to articulate a difference between them then that difference appears The difference between them is negligible shrinking to nothing If we however do detect a difference then we can speak of it sideways and that its. How do we know a cat is a cat And why do we call it a cat How much of our perception of things is based on cognitive ability and how much on linguistic resources Here in six remarkable. ,
Essays afterall they have been on my shelf for nearly a
I also noticed Prague gathering dust on the same shelf 1 ON BEING 11 SEMIOTICS AND THE SOMETHING12 AN UNNATURAL PROBLEM13 WHY IS THERE BEING Why is there being rather than nothing Because there is14 HOW WE TALK ABOUT BEING15 THE APORIA OF BEING IN ARISTOTLE16 THE DUPLICATION OF BEING17 THE UESTIONING OF THE POETS18 A MODEL OF WORLD KNOWLEDGE19 ON THE POSSIBILITY THAT BEING MIGHT ABSCOND110 THE RESISTANCES OF BEING111 THE SENSE OF CONTINUUM there is no reason why one day humanity might not invent languages different From The Known Ones112 the known ones112 CONCLUSIONS2 KANT PIERCE AND THE PLATYPUS21 MARCO POLO AND THE UNICORNThe way I started out tapping out the chapter headings became labourious and tied me to gadgets I will say that some of the sections were beguiling some puffed up crap4 The Name of the Rose 5 Foucault s Pendulum 3 Baudolino2 The Island of the Day BeforeOH The Prague Cemetery4 The Mysterious Flame of ueen Loana 4 How to Travel with a Salmon and Other EssaysCR Kant and the Platypus Essays on Language and CognitionTR Misreadings Tempted to throw out the five star rating on this one but I do not believe that this is something that is going to be really life changing or horizon broadening but it is just uite goodWhat I really loved about these ssays are their simplicity Eco does an Sinner's Heart excellent job ofxplaini I happen to like much of what I have read from Umberto Eco 1 and this book is no xception to that general njoyment Unlike many people in his field Eco had a firm grasp of the fact that communication and cognition do not operate by building castles in the air but have to address a reality that may not be perfectly understood but that provides a test of the mental theories that various people or groups make This book is full of humorous references to the difficulty of understanding the platypus and the challenge such an animal possesses when it comes to proper categorization as an Spirit of the Wolf egg laying animal with a duckbill that nevertheless otherwise resembles river dwelling mammals The author also has something interesting to say about the development of the model of the horse by the Aztecs whoncountered Montezuma and how it was the A Vineyard Christmas experience of the Spanish conuest cut off the chance that the Aztecs and their leaders had to respond to the reality of the horse and best deal with it as anlement of the Spanish military Een Bijzondere Vorm Van Osteosclerose efforts These and otherxamples demonstrate Eco s profound interest in the relationship between reality and fforts to understand it and communicate about itThis book of nearly 400 pages is divided into six chapters and numerous section within ach chapter The first chapter looks at the uestion of being and discusses the relationship between language and reality and how we talk about and deal with the problem of being 1 *After that the author discusses Kant Pierce and the platypus with a look *that the author discusses Kant Pierce and the platypus with a look how the platypus reputation was similar to the way that Polo claimed that the rhino was a unicorn 2 The third ssay looks at the relationship between cognitive types and nuclear and molar content 3 spending special time on stories about animals like the horse and oysters as well as a hilarious look at the theory of knowledge among angels that led to success for the archangel Gabriel There is a chapter on the place of the platypus between dictionary and ncyclopedia pointing out the problem of the negotiation of definitions 4 After that the author provides a chapter that looks at the nature of reference and contract 5 before closing the main contents of the book with a debate on iconism and reality 6 after which there are Hot Shot (North Ridge Book 3) endnotes a collection of works cited and an indexOne thing this author does well is demonstrate that semiotics need not be divorced from other fields but that it can provide an important link between how we think and thexternal world that we have to deal with By using animals including the horse and platypus as heroes of a journey into semiotics and its connections with other fields the author does a good job at making the material relatable and deeply amusing Platypuses for Math Basics 6 example are generally funny animals because of their mosaic nature and the long time it took to understand how it was that angg laying mammal with milk glands that acted like sweat glands than like the nipples of most mammals Voyage to the Underworld (Star Wars Missions, ended up still being a mammal The word for horse in nahuatl was originally a word that was used to refer to deer before the surviving Aztecs adopted words related to the Spanish caballo What we know or what we think we know and what is present challenges to our language as our understanding is shaped by ourxperiences while also shaping the way we interpret the reality around us If you want an The First Ghost enjoyable collection ofssays about semiotics this is certainly a worthwhile one1 See for xample A thoroughly worthwhile readI love Ecos work he is better taken slowly like great wine. G on issues that affect us very day At once philosophical and amusing Kant and the Platypus is a tour of the world of our senses told by a master of knowing what is real and what is no.Decade I Also Noticed Prague