Preview

Philosophical Problems of IT & Cyberspace (PhilIT&C)

Advanced search

Substance, name and thing in aristotle’s «computer» ontology

https://doi.org/10.17726/philIT.2022.1.4

Abstract

In this article, we will discuss the elements of classical and nonclassical ontological systems in Aristotle’s doctrine of the substance, categories and language. It is amazing that the classic heritage of ancient philosophical thought include ontological models similar to the contemporary analytic philosophy. Aristotle was the first to speculate on the substance in terms of language categories. It is the transition from the subject individual to a logical entity and then to a part of speech. The nature of knowledge is based on a single representation of the universal. According to Aristotle, only a plurality of randomly designated unique individual things exists. However, the species and genera build some logical relations between them. Therefore, the language updating of the knowledge of the world is possible only with respect to species and genera, i.e., a logical structure as thing in itself (not described) does not have any features but exists independently in the reality. On the one hand, Aristotle supports the classical nominalistic ontology (the material world is a complexity of things existing in the reality of single non-attributive objects). On the other hand, Aristotle’s ontology is a complex of objects believed existing by a statement. That is, the objects can be from imaginary or impossible worlds, but the language descriptions credit them with the function of propositional value. In both cases, language is just a method of consistent description.

About the Author

P. N. Baryshnikov
Pyatigorsk State University
Russian Federation

 Baryshnikov Pavel N. -  doctor of science (in Philosophy), assistant professor,
Department of Historical and Socio-Philosophical Disciplines, Oriental Studies and Theology

Pyatigorsk 



References

1. Losev A.F. Criticism of Platonism by Aristotle. – M.: Akademicheskiy Proekt, 2011. – S. 26-32.

2. Asmus V. F. Ancient Philosophy. – M.: Vysshaya Shkola, 2003. – S. 195-200.

3. Chanyshev A.N. Aristotle. – M., 1977. – S. 60 / quotes from Neretina S., Ogurtsov A. Paths to Universals. – Saint Petersburg: RHHA, 2006. – S. 122.

4. Guarino N. Formal ontology, conceptual analysis and knowledge representation // International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. – 1995. – Vol. 43. – P. 625-640.

5. Aristotle. On Interpretation. Four-book set, Book 2. – M.: Mysl, 1978. – S. 103.

6. Neretina S., Ogurtsov A. Paths to Universals. – Saint Petersburg: RHHA, 2006. – S. 127-128.

7. Stepanov Y.S. In the Three-Dimensional Space of Language: Semiotic Problems of Linguistics, Philosophy, and Art. – M.: LIBROCOM, 2010. – S. 32.

8. Saveliev A. L. History of the Universal Grammar Concept (from the Earliest Times to Leibniz). – Saint Petersburg: Saint Petersburg University Publishing House, 2006. – S. 57-74.

9. Aristotle. On Interpretation. 16b 25-27.

10. Aristotle. Topics, 105а 20-25.

11.


Review

For citations:


Baryshnikov P.N. Substance, name and thing in aristotle’s «computer» ontology. Philosophical Problems of IT & Cyberspace (PhilIT&C). 2022;(1):61-70. https://doi.org/10.17726/philIT.2022.1.4

Views: 468


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2305-3763 (Online)