Philosophy Dictionary of ArgumentsHome
| |||
|
| |||
| Simplicity philosophy: is not definable. E.g. One could try to define the simplicity of an object by the fact that the subject requires the shortest description. This is bound to fail, because the symbols used in the description in turn may refer to complex entities. See also unity, complexity, descriptions._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. | |||
| Author | Concept | Summary/Quotes | Sources |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Terrence W. Deacon on Simplicity - Dictionary of Arguments
I 42 Simplicity/language/Deacon: Question: why are there no simple languages that can be mastered by animals? This is not a question in the dimension simple/complex, but a question that wants to compare apples with pears. If complexity is not the reason why animals do not have language, it has to be about the daily miracle of word meaning and reference. >Word Meaning, >Reference, >Animals, >Animal language, >Language, >Language Acquisition, cf. >Complexity._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Concept/Author], [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] resp. "problem:"/"solution:", "old:"/"new:" and "thesis:" is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition. |
Dea I T. W. Deacon The Symbolic Species: The Co-evolution of language and the Brain New York 1998 Dea II Terrence W. Deacon Incomplete Nature: How Mind Emerged from Matter New York 2013 |
||
> Counter arguments against Deacon
> Counter arguments in relation to Simplicity
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2024-04-28