Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Indirect Communication (indirect + communication)
Selected AbstractsKIERKEGAARD, INDIRECT COMMUNICATION, AND AMBIGUITYTHE HEYTHROP JOURNAL, Issue 1 2009JAMIE TURNBULL Notoriously, Kierkegaard claims his project to be one of indirect communication. This paper considers the idea that Kierkegaard's distinction between direct and indirect communication is to be accounted for in terms of ambiguity. I begin by outlining the different claims Kierkegaard makes about his method, before examining the textual evidence for attributing such a distinction to him. I then turn to the work of Edward Mooney, who claims that the distinction between direct and indirect communication is to be drawn in just this way. I argue that Mooney misinterprets the type of ambiguity Kierkegaard holds to be involved in indirect communication, and consequently ends up with an unsatisfactory account of Kierkegaard's method. Finally I seek to cast doubt on the very idea that ambiguity might do justice to the claims Kierkegaard makes about his project, and suggest that what is required to do so is a theological interpretation of his work. [source] The Strategies of "Goblet Words": Indirect Communication in the ZhuangziJOURNAL OF CHINESE PHILOSOPHY, Issue 2 2004Youru Wang [source] Reversible, Fine Performance Tuning of an Organometallic Molecular Wire by Addition, Ligand Replacement and Removal of Dicobalt FragmentsEUROPEAN JOURNAL OF INORGANIC CHEMISTRY, Issue 23 2010Yuya Tanaka Abstract Communication between the two iron centres in (dithienylethyne)diyl complex 1 can be finely tuned by reversible addition to, ligand replacement at and removal from the C,C moiety in 1 of dicobalt fragments Co2(CO)n(PR3)6,n. Performance analysis reveals that disparate mechanisms are in operation for the two systems. In the case of the dicobalt adducts, indirect communication via the dicobalt steppingstone can be finely tuned by controlling the electronic structure of the dicobalt unit. [source] Kierkegaard's Socrates: a Venture in Evolutionary TheoryMODERN THEOLOGY, Issue 4 2001Mary-Jane Rubenstein This essay explores the shifts in Kierkegaard's conceptions of Socrates, looking to produce a more nuanced reading of Kierkegaardian indirect communication, faith, and subjectivity. Entirely bound up with his increasingly troubled view of Hegel and Hegelianism, Kierkegaard's relationship to Socrates can be traced through three of his major texts: The Concept of Irony, Philosophical Fragments, and The Concluding Unscientific Postscript. By examining these three works, this essay charts a path from a critique of the Socratic as un -speculative, through a deep resentment of the Socratic as proto -speculative, to admiration and imitation of the Socratic as anti -speculative. Ultimately, it is argued, Kierkegaard and the pseudonyms rely upon Socrates to rehabilitate subjectivity out of the undifferentiated totality of nineteenth century idealism. [source] KIERKEGAARD, INDIRECT COMMUNICATION, AND AMBIGUITYTHE HEYTHROP JOURNAL, Issue 1 2009JAMIE TURNBULL Notoriously, Kierkegaard claims his project to be one of indirect communication. This paper considers the idea that Kierkegaard's distinction between direct and indirect communication is to be accounted for in terms of ambiguity. I begin by outlining the different claims Kierkegaard makes about his method, before examining the textual evidence for attributing such a distinction to him. I then turn to the work of Edward Mooney, who claims that the distinction between direct and indirect communication is to be drawn in just this way. I argue that Mooney misinterprets the type of ambiguity Kierkegaard holds to be involved in indirect communication, and consequently ends up with an unsatisfactory account of Kierkegaard's method. Finally I seek to cast doubt on the very idea that ambiguity might do justice to the claims Kierkegaard makes about his project, and suggest that what is required to do so is a theological interpretation of his work. [source] | ||||||||||