Revisiting the Graphical/Linguistic Debate

Croatian Journal of Philosophy 4 (10):139-148 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

We seem to have strong intuitions that many visual representations -- such as descriptions, depictions and diagrams -- can be classified into different types. But how should we understand the differences between these representational types? On a standard view, the answer is assumed to lie in the presence or absence of a single property. I argue first that this assumption is undermotivated, and offer a particular two-property analysis, which can be used both to differentiate the various types and to understand better what factors affect changes in classification. This in turn can also be used to capture a core idea of perspicuity, and to ground an argument for the general perspicuity of diagrams as a representational type. Finally, I suggest that two complementary and independently plausible theories bearing on the nature of diagrammatic representation can be located within the suggested two-property approach

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Property evaluation types.Alessandro Giordani & Luca Mari - 2012 - Measurement 45 (3):437-452.
A Diagrammatic Inference System with Euler Circles.Koji Mineshima, Mitsuhiro Okada & Ryo Takemura - 2012 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 21 (3):365-391.
Diagrams as sketches.Brice Halimi - 2012 - Synthese 186 (1):387-409.
Why feynman diagrams represent.Letitia Meynell - 2008 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22 (1):39 – 59.

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-01-04

Downloads
27 (#1,669,918)

6 months
1 (#2,172,958)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations