Showing papers on "Ontology (information science) published in 1976"
88 citations
83 citations
41 citations
31 citations
29 citations
[...]
19 citations
Journal Article•
17 citations
15 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a study of the relationship between real and allegorical relationships in the Bible is presented, and the authors argue that the relationship is consistent throughout Milton's major epic, their allegorical onomastic onomastics notwithstanding.
Abstract: N Book IV of Paradise Regained Satan, having repeatedly failed to learn from Christ the nature of his mission on earth, tries to deter]I mine the truth of the matter by reading the stars. The heavenly signs are, however, characteristically ambiguous: “A Kingdom they portend thee,” the Devil tells Jesus, “but what Kingdom, / Real or Allegoric I discern not.”l The truth, of course, is that Jesus’ kingdom is real but not of this world, a distinction Satan fails to make, because his notions of “reality” are exclusively mundane and literal. At the same time, the phrase “Real or Allegoric” implies a distinction, indeed a contrariety, that Satan makes when he ought not to, namely, that something cannot be real andallegoric at the same time. The Devil’s position is curious indeed, especially considering the very real relationship he “enjoys” with his allegorical daughter Sin in Paradise Lost. This paper is a study of that relationship from a twofold perspective. It will argue that Sin and her son Death are consistently real (i.e., physical and historical) throughout Milton’s major epic, their allegorical onomastics notwithstanding; and it will explore certain consequences of their absolute historicity in the area of Miltonic comparative mythology. Specifically, when the poet uses Greek myth to describe the cephalic birth of Sin, he is not merely engaging in literary allusion, or merely criticizing Greek heroism by associating it with Satan, or merely trivializing Greek
TL;DR: The authors published the commentaries written for Georg Lukács after reading the last version of his book, On the Ontology of Social Reality, and reread our “Notes on Lukacs Ontology,” and it became immediately clear that for various reasons, we would have to write a collective introduction to the text.
Abstract: I. When we decided to publish the commentaries written for our friend and teacher Georg Lukács after reading the last version of his book, On the Ontology of Social Reality, and we reread our “Notes on Lukács Ontology,” it became immediately clear that for various reasons, we would have to write a collective introduction to the text. First—not necessarily in order of importance—to provide a few sketchy comments concerning the work's genesis, which is frequently discussed but scarcely known in its entirety. At the end of 1961 or the beginning of 1962, i.e., soon after the German manuscript of Volume I of the enormous book, Die Eigenart der Aesthetischen, was finished, Georg Lukács began a project he had cherished in his young years—his ethics.
TL;DR: The ontology of sport is concerned with the role of sport in the lived experience and the role that sport plays in the development of individuals and society.
Abstract: (1976). On The Path Towards An Ontology of Sport. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport: Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 25-34.
TL;DR: In this paper, the relation between reality and our models of it emerges as very much the same for social science as it is for natural science (see Bunge 1959:95), and the objective relations we seek to understand exist independently of the analyst, in the behavior of the phenomena under study.
Abstract: perspective suggested here, the relation between reality and our models of it emerges as very much the same for social science as it is for natural science (see Bunge 1959:95). In both cases, the objective relations we seek to understand exist independently of the analyst, in the behavior of the phenomena under study. The natural or social scientist's job is to make statements about those relations, not to create them.
[...]