Intentionality, Conceptual Content, and Emotions

Léo Peruzzo Júnior

Resumo


The present study aims at supporting the argument that emotions, unlike a physicalistic interpretation, cannot be reduced to the conceptual elements used in the communication or exteriorization process. The subject is based on two hypotheses: the first is that the relation between the issuance of an emotive content (emotion) and a possible mental representation presents a linguistic nature. In general terms, this means that an emotion, or the psychological content associated with it is based on the plot of other concepts. The second hypothesis is that it is not possible to refer to emotions without considering cognition from a semantic problem and, consequently, in the refusal of a realistic or anti-realistic posture in relation to the way the phenomena - internal and/or external to our consciousness - are referred. Thus, a conceptual model to understand emotions would be essential to settle the problem associated with ordinary language, realism, and the computational tendencies that comprehend the mental content in strictly syntactic terms.

Palavras-chave


Intencionalidade; Conteúdo conceitual; Emoções; Linguagem.

Texto completo:

PDF (English)

Referências


BERMÚDEZ, J. L. The Notion of a Nonconceptual Point of View. In: BERMÚDEZ, J. L.; MARCEL, A. J.; Eilan, N. (Ed.). The Body and the Self. Cambridge/MA: MIT Press. 1995a. p. 153-173. COLOMBETTI, G. From affect programs to dynamical discrete emoticons. Philosophical Psychology, v. 22, n. 4, p. 407-425, 2009.

DAMÁSIO, A. O Mistério da consciência: do corpo e das emoções ao conhecimento em si. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2000.

EVANS, G. The Varieties of Reference. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982.

GRIFFTHIS, P. Griffiths, na obra What Emotions Really Are: the problem of Pshychological Categories. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1997.

GRIFFITHS, P. Emotions in the wild: The situated perspective on emotion. In: ROBBINS, P.; AYEDEDE, M. (Eds.). Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

KANT, I. Crítica da Razão Prática. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2002.

McDOWELL, J. Sellars on Perceptual Experience. The Journal of Philosophy, New York, v. 95, n. 9, p. 431-450, sep. 1998.

McDOWELL, J. Mente e Mundo. Aparecida: Ideias & Letras, 2005.

MEUNIER, J.-G. “Theories and Models: Realism and Objectivity in Cognitive Science”. In: AGAZZI, E. (Ed.). Varieties of Scientific Realism. Objectivity and Truth in Science. Germany: Springer, 2017.

PERUZZO JÚNIOR, L. As antinomias Metaéticas entre cegos e não-cegos e o problema do realismo moral. Veritas, Porto Alegre, v. 61, n. 1, p. 62-74, 2016.

PERUZZO JÚNIOR, L. Realidade, Linguagem e Metaética em Wittgenstein. Curitiba: PUCPRESS, 2018.

PLACE, U. T. Is consciouciousness a brain process? In: LYON, W. (Org). Modern philosophy of mind. London: Ed. Everyman, 2002.

SELLARS, W. Science and Metaphysics: Variations on Kantian Themes. Atascadero: Ridgeview Publishing Co., 1992.

SELLARS, W. Empiricism and the Philosophy of Mind. Introduction by Richard Rorty, and a study guide by Robert Brandom. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1997.

SMART, J. J. C. Sensations and brain processes. The Philosophical Review, v. 68, n. 2, p. 141-156, 1959a. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 24 mai. 2019.

SMART, J. J. C. The content of physicalism. The Philosophical Quarterly, v. 28, n. 113, p. 339-341, 1978. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 24 mai. 2019.

VELMANS, M. Consciousness and the "causal paradox”. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, v. 19, n. 3, p. 537-542, 1996.

VELMANS, M. What Perception Becomes Conscious. British Journal of Psychology, v. 90, n. 4, p. 543-566, 2010.

WITTGENSTEIN, L. Investigações Filosóficas. Lisboa: Calouste Gulbenkian, 1995.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7213/1980-5934.31.054.DS10

Apontamentos

  • Não há apontamentos.




Direitos autorais 2019 Editora Universitária Champagnat