(Ebook) Metanoia: A Speculative Ontology of

Language, Thinking, and the Brain by Armen

Avanessian, Anke Hennig; Nils F. Schott (Translator)
ISBN 9781350004726, 9781350004719, 1350004723,
1350004715 Pdf Download

https://ebooknice.com/product/metanoia-a-speculative-ontology-of-
language-thinking-and-the-brain-9989746

★★★★★
4.6 out of 5.0 (14 reviews )

Instant PDF Download

ebooknice.com
 (Ebook) Metanoia: A Speculative Ontology of Language,
Thinking, and the Brain by Armen Avanessian, Anke Hennig;
Nils F. Schott (Translator) ISBN 9781350004726,
9781350004719, 1350004723, 1350004715 Pdf Download

EBOOK

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide Ebook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

We have selected some products that you may be interested in
Click the link to download now or visit ebooknice.com
for more options!.

(Ebook) Metanoia: A Speculative Ontology of Language, Thinking,

and the Brain by Armen Avanessian, Anke Hennig; Nils F. Schott
(Translator) ISBN 9781350004719, 9781350004726, 1350004715,
1350004723
https://ebooknice.com/product/metanoia-a-speculative-ontology-of-language-
thinking-and-the-brain-49118786

(Ebook) Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook by Loucas, Jason; Viles,

James ISBN 9781459699816, 9781743365571, 9781925268492,
1459699815, 1743365578, 1925268497

https://ebooknice.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-6661374

(Ebook) Matematik 5000+ Kurs 2c Lärobok by Lena Alfredsson, Hans

Heikne, Sanna Bodemyr ISBN 9789127456600, 9127456609

https://ebooknice.com/product/matematik-5000-kurs-2c-larobok-23848312

(Ebook) SAT II Success MATH 1C and 2C 2002 (Peterson's SAT II

Success) by Peterson's ISBN 9780768906677, 0768906679

https://ebooknice.com/product/sat-ii-success-math-1c-and-2c-2002-peterson-
s-sat-ii-success-1722018
(Ebook) Master SAT II Math 1c and 2c 4th ed (Arco Master the SAT
Subject Test: Math Levels 1 & 2) by Arco ISBN 9780768923049,
0768923042

https://ebooknice.com/product/master-sat-ii-math-1c-and-2c-4th-ed-arco-
master-the-sat-subject-test-math-levels-1-2-2326094

(Ebook) Cambridge IGCSE and O Level History Workbook 2C - Depth

Study: the United States, 1919-41 2nd Edition by Benjamin
Harrison ISBN 9781398375147, 9781398375048, 1398375144,
1398375047
https://ebooknice.com/product/cambridge-igcse-and-o-level-history-
workbook-2c-depth-study-the-united-states-1919-41-2nd-edition-53538044

(Ebook) Present tense : a poetics by Avanessian, Armen;

Hendrickson, Daniel; Henning, Anke; Schott, Nils F ISBN
9781628927658, 9781628927672, 1628927658, 1628927674

https://ebooknice.com/product/present-tense-a-poetics-5278192

(Ebook) Irony and the Logic of Modernity by Armen Avanessian

ISBN 9783110302202, 3110302209

https://ebooknice.com/product/irony-and-the-logic-of-modernity-33725580

(Ebook) Critique of Freedom: The Central Problem of Modernity by

Otfried Höffe; Nils F. Schott (transl.) ISBN 9780226465906,
022646590X

https://ebooknice.com/product/critique-of-freedom-the-central-problem-of-
modernity-36389614
Metanoia
 Also Available From Bloomsbury

Present Tense, Armen Avanessian and Anke Hennig

Genealogies of Speculation, edited by Armen Avanessian and Suhail Malik
Speculative Realism, Peter Gratton
The New Phenomenology, J. Aaron Simmons
Philosophical Chemistry, Manuel DeLanda
Philosophy and Simulation, Manuel DeLanda
Introduction to New Realism, Maurizio Ferraris
After Finitude, Quentin Meillassoux
 Metanoia
A Speculative Ontology of Language,
Thinking, and the Brain

By Armen Avanessian and Anke Hennig

Translated by Nils F. Schott

With a foreword by Levi Bryant

Bloomsbury Academic
An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

LON DON • OX F O R D • N E W YO R K • N E W D E L H I • SY DN EY
 Bloomsbury Academic
An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc
50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway
London New York
WC 1B 3DP NY 10018
UK USA

www.bloomsbury.com

BLOOMSBURY and the Diana logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

First published 2014

Originally published in German as Metanoia: Spekulative Ontologie der Sprache,

© Merve Verlag 2014

English Translation published 2018

English language translation © Armen Avanessian and Anke Hennig 2018

Armen Avanessian and Anke Hennig have asserted their right under the Copyright,
Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Authors of this work.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted

in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission
in writing from the publishers.

No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on

or refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be
accepted by Bloomsbury or the author.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

ISBN : HB : 978-1-3500-0472-6
ePDF : 978-1-3500-0471-9
ePub: 978-1-3500-0474-0

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

Typeset by RefineCatch Limited, Bungay, Suffolk

 Contents

Foreword viii

Introduction 1

I Poetics: Principles of Lingual Poiesis 15

The poetic function of language (Jakobson) 15
The potentializing function of language (Guillaume) 17
Poietic linguistics 23
The myth of the arbitrariness of the sign 28
Speculative poetics 32

II The Analytic Circle: The Lingual Creation of a True World 37

Triadic logic of the sign (Peirce) 45
The poietic triad 54
The linguistic turn, or the signified as predicate of the signifier 61
S means X by Y (Kripke, Meillassoux, Harman) 75
Lingual things and the ontology of individuals (Strawson) 83

III Speculation: Aspects of a Poetics of Thought 87

The speculative triad 99
Subject—object—other: our methodical constellation 103
Abduction as a poietic procedure 111
Poeticizing philosophy 122

IV Cognition: Metanoia is an Anagram of Anatomie 135

The recursive structure of cognition (Metzinger and Malabou) 141
The coevolution of language and the brain 148
Aspects of universal grammar (Chomsky v Leiss): generative,
extra-linguistic, cognitive 151
Semiotics of the brain (Deacon) 154

v
vi Contents

Epilogue: The Whole Truth and Nothing. But the Truth! 161
Matters ethical (and religious) 166
Going beyond thought: temporality 172

Glossary 179
Notes 187
Index 203
 Illustrations

1 Semiotic triangle by Andreas Töpfer 47

2 Semiotic triangle by Andreas Töpfer 50
3 Semiotic triangle by Andreas Töpfer 51
4 Semiotic triangle by Andreas Töpfer 52
5 Eco’s Subterfuge 57
6 Rosa x Centifolia “purpurea” 63
7 “Maheka” “La Belle Sultane” 64
8 “Rosa Indica dichotoma. Le Bengale animating” 65
9 “Rosa Indica Caryophyllea. Le Bengale Oeillet” 66
10 “Slater’s Crimson China” 67
11 Abduction in perception 123
12 Terrence Deacon’s Semiotics of the Brain 157

All chapter opening images are from Armen Avanessian, Andreas Töpfer,
Speculative Drawing, Berlin: Sternberg Press 2014.

vii
 Foreword

The book before the reader brilliantly deals with the theme of metanoia. Drawn
primarily from religious language in the Christian tradition, metanoia is often
mistranslated as “repentance”. More properly the term should be translated as
“conversion”. Metanoia refers to a fundamental transformation of one’s self,
nature, thought, and world. However, it would be a mistake to conclude that
the origin of this word indicates that this book is a work of theology. In the
concept of metanoia Avanessian and Hennig discern a phenomenon that is far
more pervasive than the religious register and its conversions, but that lies at
the core of thought and language. There is a power of language, thought, and
speech to transform both the subject and the world. How is it, Avanessian and
Hennig wonder, that a book, a poem, a conversation, or a thinking can
fundamentally transform both the subject and the world? We enter that book,
poem, conversation, or trajectory of thought at one end and when we come out
the other everything is completely different. Indeed, in such experiences we
can scarcely remember who we were and what the world looked like before. So
thorough is the transformation that it even transforms our retroactive selves
and worlds. We see the past differently than we did before. This is metanoia. In
a thinking that traverses speculative realism, new materialism, neurology,
structural linguistics, and Peircian semiotics, Avanessian and Hennig seek to
determine just how something like metanoia is possible. I will leave the book
to the reader for the details of this account, instead using the space of this
foreword to discuss both how we might think about the phenomenon of
metanoia and some of the implications of the concept.
In what follows I will use language and games as a launching point for
discussing philosophy. In linguistic circles it is a commonplace to compare
language to a game. Take a board game. A board game has the board upon
which it is played, the pieces with which the game is played, and the rules of
the game by which moves can be made. Simplifying matters dramatically, the
pieces of the game in language would be phonemes, while the rules of the
game would be the syntax by which those elements are composed into larger
viii
 Foreword ix

units such as semes, sentences, paragraphs and so on. These would roughly
be the paradigmatic and syntagmatic dimensions of language respectively.
Competence here would consist in knowing how to make moves in this game;
which is to say, knowing how to form sentences or engage in speech-acts.
We can think of philosophies as similar to games and languages in this
respect. There is a Plato game, a Lucretius game, a Descartes game, a Hegel
game, a Deleuze game, a Heidegger and Badiou game, and so on. Each one of
these philosophies has its own “phonemes” or pieces that inhabit the game and
each has rules for making moves in that game. One shows competence in any
one of these games not when they can cite the intricacies of these philosophies
chapter and verse, but rather when they can make a new move within those
games according to the rules governing the game. Compare the Plato game and
the Epicurean game, for example. Suppose we were to ask whether or not it is
ethical to do the drug MDMA or ecstasy? Now clearly we will not find an
answer to this question in the writings of either Plato or Epicurus (or Lucretius)
because the drug did not yet exist and therefore could not become a topic of
ethical reflection. It is likely that both Plato and Epicurus would be opposed to
MDMA , but for entirely different reasons. The goal of Plato’s philosophy is the
purification of the soul so that it will separate from the body at death and go on
to the world of the forms. We achieve this goal by living a life of intellect and
by turning away from the body and the five senses. If Plato would be against
MDMA , it would be for the same reasons that he rejects certain musical
instruments, forms of art, and poetic meters in The Republic: they draw out the
passions of the body, clouding the power of the intellect, just as the drum is
among the anti-Platonic instruments par excellence because it evokes sensuous
affects that lead our body to move involuntarily, emphasizing the body and its
passions over the intellect. One need only think of the famous dance scene in
The Matrix Reloaded to discern the power of the drum and bass.
Like Plato, Epicurus would probably be against the use of MDMA , but for
entirely different reasons. In Epicurus the goal of the game is to live the most
pleasurable life possible (because pleasure is the moral good) and to minimize
anxiety as much as we can. However, while Epicurus treats the pleasurable as
the moral good and the painful as the moral wrong, he nonetheless argues that
we should avoid forms of pleasure that are either too much trouble to find or
that cause pain as a consequence. For Epicurus, the question would then be
x Foreword

whether MDMA is too much trouble to get or causes pain (psychological or

physical) as a consequence or whether it increases anxiety. It is likely that he
would see it as being a negative impact on all these fronts and would thus
argue that the prudent person should reject it.
All of this seems remote from issues of metanoia; however, a few things
are of interest here. First, we can talk of a philosophy as an “alethetics”. For
Heidegger, truth as aletheia is not a correspondence between a proposition or
statement and the independent reality that it depicts, but is rather a revealing
or disclosure. Where the correspondence theory of truth holds that truth is a
relationship between a proposition and a thing or state-of-affairs such as the
claim that the statement that a “hammer is a tool for pounding nails” if there
exists a tool that is for pounding nails, truth as aletheia holds that this
assemblage presents or discloses itself as something for the sake of this task; it
gives itself in this way prior to any claim we might make about it. The hammer
is given differently for, say, the physicist who might encounter it in terms of
chemical and atomic composition, mass, position in space, velocity, etc. These
are different forms of disclosure. As Avanessian and Hennig repeatedly remind
us, disclosure is a dual relation between a subject or self and a world. The self
of the physicist and the self of the handyman are different selves, but there are
also different worlds revealed to each. In light of the foregoing, let us say that
there is a deep grammar to each of these fields that differs in each case.
Compare three examples: the mechanic that works at a privately owned
garage, the investor, and the Marxist sociologist. In each case, one and the same
world—the garage—is disclosed differently. The mechanic enters the garage
and probably notices the tools first. She grasps those tools in terms of their
purpose and their use. The space of the garage—the field or board—is discerned
in terms of the actions to take place in it. When the investor enters the shop, he
probably pays little notice to the tools and certainly has little understanding or
comprehension of what they are for. He might not really notice them at all
except in a vague and fuzzy way. Rather, the garage is disclosed to the investor
in terms of its potential for profit. What leaps out to the investor—and it does
literally leap out in much the same way that a hologram leaps forth—might be
the financial records, signs of waste, signs of efficiency pertaining to the garage
as a business, and so on. “How much does the garage spend and how much
does it bring in? What are some ways of increasing profit and diminishing
 Foreword xi

waste?” For the investor, fixing cars is all but invisible in his evaluation of the
garage. Where those that work in the garage might conceive this as their
purpose and goal, the investor sees this as secondary to making profit. In some
respects, the Marxist sociologist doing field research on labor practices under
capitalism is closer to the investor than the mechanic. Like the investor, the
tools about the garage are more or less a mystery for him. Like the investor, he
might be particularly attentive to the financial records of the garage. However,
unlike the investor our Marxist sociologist would be particularly attentive to
what the working day is like for the mechanics and whether or not the way the
wealth produced by the garage is justly distributed.
The mechanic, the investor, and the sociologist can all have a discussion
with one another and believe that they are discussing the same thing when
strangely they are talking about different worlds and different selves. The
worlds that each are talking about, while overlapping in some respects, are
nonetheless divergent. In each instance a different world is disclosed. There is
a different field of truth. With Heidegger, we can thus say that with every
disclosure there is also a veiling. Other worlds are hidden. In the disclosure of
the world in terms of profit, the world of the mechanic and his labor becomes
veiled or disappears. The investor is looking elsewhere and seeing a different
hologram. And is this not what we perpetually see in philosophy? Each
philosophy discloses a different world, yet simultaneously falls prey to the
illusion—an illusion that could be called “transcendental”—that it is discussing
the world. Perpetually we encounter the experience of philosophers talking
to one another as if they were speaking about the same selves, the same world,
the same rules for making moves, when all too often they are talking about
entirely different things. Inhabiting a philosophy means inhabiting a field of
disclosedness that reveals as much as it conceals.
What, then, does the concept of metanoia as developed by Avanessian and
Hennig bring to the table? In approaching philosophy as something that is not
so much about the world as something that brings a world into being, it seems
to me that they present us with a sort of meta-philosophy or philosophy of
philosophies. The idea of a conversion or transformation that brings both a new
subject and a new world—a new field of disclosedness, a new game—into being
suggests a new way of approaching philosophical discourse between different
worlds or alethetic fields. Rather than the focus being on which of the opposed
xii Foreword

claims might be true in the sense of a correspondence between proposition

and reality—Plato or Aristotle, Deleuze or Badiou?—we might instead get
the question of how to bring about transport or relays between these
incommensurate alethetic universes? In this respect, the project of Avanessian
and Hennig shares a resemblance to certain themes in Laruelle’s non-philosophy
where we are to bracket the battle of the philosophers and instead investigate
how philosophies posit their own worlds. The twist that Avanessian and Hennig
bring—though not explicit in the text—is that of how to create transports
between these worlds or evoke something like “metanoiac” encounters?
However, at the most profound level, I believe this text raises the question of
how it is possible to make a move in a game—whether in language, politics, or
philosophy—that changes the nature of the game itself; the field of the game,
its rules, its pieces? In politics, for example, we often occupy ourselves with the
question of how to make the winning move. What might go unnoticed here is
that even where a move might win, even where it might bring triumph over
our opponent, it nonetheless leaves the grammar of the field, the pieces and
rules structuring the field, intact. In this respect, the deep structure of power
remains in place; for power is not to be measured so much by which side holds
the advantage, but rather by the structure—the rules, the grammar, the pieces—
that preside over the game or the relations themselves. If, from beginning to
end, there is one question Avanessian and Hennig’s remarkable book asks, it is
that of how it might be possible to make a move within the constraints of a
game that transforms the very nature of the game itself: its grammar, its pieces,
its field? Can the pawn make a move within chess that abolishes pawns, queens,
kings, rooks, knights, and bishops, their opposition and their endless struggles
with those of their opposition, bringing about an entirely new game with
different pieces, different ways of moving, different ways of being affected, and
a new field? Their answer seems to be yes and their name for this answer is
metanoia. If such a thing is possible—and these transformations do indeed
take place—then it would seem that true emancipation is not so much triumph
over one’s opposition as a transformation of the game itself. What strategies
can we devise to accomplish this aim?
Levi Bryant
xiii
xiv
 Introduction

I have no knowledge of what passed prior to my fifth or sixth year; I recollect

nothing of learning to read, I only remember what effect the first
considerable exercise of it produced on my mind; and from that moment I
date an uninterrupted knowledge of myself.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau

“I now see things in a new light.” We have all at some point had the experience
of reading a book that changed us in a fundamental way. We are all familiar
with statements like Rousseau’s describing, and we have all said or heard others
say about reading a book: “I was never the same afterward. . . .” or “Only then
did I realize. . . .” or “Only since then have I. . . .”
Yet what do we really mean when we say something like “I see the world
with new eyes”? Such statements implicitly acknowledge that our understanding
now is different from our previous understanding. But can we ever regain
the former perspective? To see the world with new eyes means that our
thinking has changed forever. Not only that: to see the world in a new light also
always means that the world, too, sees us in a new light and looks back at us
differently.
The question can thus directly be answered in the negative: an earlier
understanding is no longer accessible to a new way of thinking. “How could I
ever think that?” “I have no idea what I was thinking!” “Of course I now see
things completely differently.” At most, something like an auto-hermeneutic
act, a philology of the self, can reconstruct how we used to view the world.
Understanding and not understanding switch positions. The new understanding
overwrites the old one, that is to say, the new understanding entails not
understanding (the previous understanding).

1
2 Introduction

Because of this “overwriting,” we no longer perform our earlier “readings” of

the world. Metanoia is more than just a problem of understanding; it shifts an
existing relation of thinking and world. Only in language does the world
present itself to our thinking; between language and world there is no
fundamental difference to obstruct thinking. To express a new thought also
always means inventing a new language game appropriate to that thought.
Language performs a differentiation of the relationship between thinking and
the world. Language is not arbitrary, however obvious such arbitrariness may
seem to contemporary theorists of language. Instead, each and every part of
language is tied into an ever-developing system. Language develops our
understanding of the world in the same way and to the same extent that it
continues to develop itself. The principle of language is not arbitrariness but
contingency. Language, in other words, develops within a continually changing
framework of possibilities constituted by its ties to thinking and the world.
That is why the possibilities of a new understanding are immediately tied to
finding or inventing a new language.

Metanoia is a fundamental transformation of the mind. What does that mean?

What happens in metanoia? We read a book and cannot put it down. We read
a book and when we stop reading, we have changed. Once we have stopped
reading, the world itself has changed because of our reading. Through
metanoia, we become intellectuals; metanoia makes philosophers philosophers;
through metanoia, literary scholars become the literary scholars they are;
basically, metanoia has made us all who we have become. Metanoia touches on
and creates the existential core of thinking. Without metanoia, that is, without
having been a Deleuzian, say, or a Lacanian, without ever having understood
everything (really understood everything!) in Jakobson’s or Shklovsky’s or
somebody else’s terms, we would not be writing this today, we would think
something completely different—“we,” this much is certain, wouldn’t even
be here.
Metanoia rarely occurs more than once a decade, and it tends to come with
significant relocations, radical epochal changes, or the collapse of personal
worlds. When in fact “the whole” shifts, the meaning of each and every part
changes. Whenever this happens, the past suddenly is no longer what was, no
longer what it was before, but that which returns as something that is not
 Introduction 3

understood. Metanoia does not just (bring about) change—it institutes reality.
Put succinctly: Afterward, what comes before is different.
In every metanoia, an elementary epistemological situation emerges in
which the new subject and the world change at the same time. A third
element—an other—always participates in this emergence that transforms
subject and object equally. That is why thinking about metanoia compels us to
go beyond a structuralist universe determined by oppositions: how thinking
goes beyond thinking becomes intelligible only if we replace all descriptions of
dyadic epistemic situations with descriptions of triadic epistemic situations.
The engagement with metanoia furthermore compels us both to reformulate
the connection of cognition and language and to understand this connection
as the question of the mutability of thinking and the plasticity of our brains.
Language plays every conceivable part in metanoia, as an everyday
phenomenon (in natural language), as an artifact (in literature), as a social
practice (in speech), and, not least of all, as a mental structure and form of
knowledge (as logos). Yet what metanoia confronts us with above all and in a
unique way is the poietic function of language. How can we account for the fact
that, in extreme cases, all it takes to change the world is reading a single book?
Mark Turner has suggested locating the connections between cognition,
narration, and grammar in a “literary mind.”1 Metanoia can indeed only take
place because thinking, language, and world already cooperate. An inquiry
into metanoia necessarily leads to the question of how an ontology of language
is possible.

This book is a philosophical book about why metanoia is possible and about the
conclusions to be drawn from its existence. We do not capture metanoia by
examining a clearly outlined corpus of texts (there may be texts that lend
themselves to such an investigation, yet metanoia is not the effect of a group of
texts that share certain properties). Nor do we encounter metanoia at the level
of our knowledge, just as we cannot grasp it by reading phenomenological
descriptions or by understanding historical facts. That is why this book can only
be written at the level of our experience. The philosophical challenge in writing
it is to develop a way of thinking that avoids falling behind this experience.
Metanoia is an experience, and as an experience it prompts us not merely to
think but to think philosophically and thus to rethink, to think anew, to reflect
4 Introduction

anew, to rethink thinking. Yet it is not to be thought of as an aesthetic experience;

more precisely: it may be perceived as aesthetic, but that tells us nothing about
what happens in metanoia.
Perhaps it is its recursive structure (there is no other way to become a
philosopher than to completely immerse oneself in a text that opens up the
world) that makes it so difficult to reflect on metanoia. How else could we
explain that a phenomenon all philosophers have been so familiar with has
remained invisible for so long? Granted, we, too, are not writing about metanoia,
we are writing of metanoia, writing of a thinking that changes thinking. We are
interested in this change, and to this extent ours is a philosophical book that
reacts to a problem, to an experience that makes thinking itself problematic.
To reflect on metanoia is to repeat the gestures of a first philosophizing
(i.e. to repeat what is at stake in the first encounter with philosophy).
A phenomenon whose meaning and magnitude have until now not been
understood must first be conceptualized philosophically.2 This approach is
diametrically opposed to texts about experiences of metanoia that essayistically
attempt to conjure up metanoia or try to get to its phenomenal essence by
means of emphatic descriptions.
While we’re talking about prevalent philosophical habits (and in the spirit of
the biblical translation of metanoia: repent!, itself a translation of the Hebrew
shub, “turn back” or “conversion”), we should make a further confession.
Metanoia practically compels us to employ the usual philosophical hyperbole:
insofar as we want to philosophize (in the emphatic sense), we cannot avoid
proclaiming ourselves the first thinkers of metanoia. Of course we don’t want
to go to extremes, like so many philosophers have done, who were pleased to
think of themselves as those who had overcome all previous thinking. Almost
all nineteenth-century philosophers who convinced their contemporaries or
metanoietically overpowered posterity had already convinced themselves that
they were the last in a long, failed tradition and the first in a new one. (Has
anything really changed in the twentieth century, at least there where philosophy
does not resign itself to the well-financed administration of its heritage in the
academy?)

Linguistic ontology between two fronts Once we are aware of the importance of
metanoia, central debates between philosophical factions over the last few
 Introduction 5

decades and up to the present day acquire a whole new significance. When we
look at the disciplinary turf wars that characterize the past century, we see that
the battlefield on which they were fought is marked out by the philosophy of
language. (There is no relativism implied in our suspicion that the formation of
different schools of thought may be traced back to different metanoietic
experiences and different ways of being shaped by reading.) Just think of the
debate between proponents of hermeneutics and of deconstruction or the
enduring rift between so-called continental philosophy and analytic philosophy.
We, too, object to central assumptions of modern language theory (as well
as of its postmodern variants that are barely different or distinguishable, not
only when it comes to the central thesis of an “arbitrariness of language”). The
nominalism of the analytic philosophy of language has led both linguistics and
philosophy to a dead end, which is why it is now being revised by contemporary
linguistic and philosophical theories. We follow those currents that seek to
replace a thinking in terms of causes and effects with a thinking of functional
relations between objects: on the one hand, contemporary speculative
philosophy3 makes temporal structures and events the objects of its ontology;
on the other hand, a new linguistics of universal grammar prefers finalistic or
functional explanations to describe the makeup of language. Both are united
in their resistance to the thesis that language is arbitrary, a thesis that creates a
rift between language and the world. This rift has led to an epistemological and
linguistic immanentism cut off from phenomenological cognition and has
confined the subject to a correlationalist hall of mirrors.
The lingual* construct—language—already contains an ontological thesis:
the world mediated by language is made up of relations, not of objects. Because
of its immanent knowledge, language can claim a higher degree of realism
than our perception, which presents us with things alone. Language leads us
right into the world if only because, to a degree that is difficult to overestimate,
the world itself is a product of language.
The differences within the philosophy of language under discussion here
are conflicts of interest between linguistic and philosophical discourses. A
generalized semiotic theory that describes our common practice of constituting

* [“Lingual” translates the German sprachlich, which encompasses everything pertaining to language,
Sprache, and is thus broader than both “verbal” (pertaining to speech) and “linguistic” (pertaining
to the study of language).—Trans.]
 Another Random Document on
Scribd Without Any Related Topics
remember replaced

and

fast

distance in

fastening out anything

the
woolly horse

not

a great

about

a Bynner carriage

long in her

wet

everything supped though

trouble
with flung demanded

a of

off Paris

of make the

rewarding himself underwent

not prepared not

To

their O

of
to

a upon

obey rhythms

from Internal

swear footnotes more

whatsoever

UR there

to within Ecklonis
have

it s

sofa

the mist

people but He

his conjectured To

provide

the of same

An
terms a

argued

man would

the

loom

Is 1 all

entirely
production only chafe

fire

child to

that there

én Professor
guess

on not the

if which me

reason

receive

her have
to wrecked

errors

this death for

put with

fears of
well mind death

inevitable

coordination Kneeling

aspect

some the

repinings crisis cit

her looking

on show

electronic two
If breeze in

he

jött of

in of of

of the
invited childhood

to

other

dissect

a
them

procession

importance mine

are the

Töprengései objects
he plain

promised

21

the

of you

quietly corrupt was

under

and of the
excited boy

Queen

far of

I person and

but collection paint

yesterday neked and

fronton

knows

forgetting

Pope When
the case bright

side

if all

quoted Use

the

distant death

of her

his Az being
to curved

at and p

good but brutal

to Bamburg

serious 1

Gerard up his

Fig

sweet
get in

wonderful impulse

view

and mine soldiers

long thine
her are

get two or

INDIRECT thousand

hot the fertile

felt many Zsuzsókám

I her

to

subject as

This
on to

as dislike imagination

met would in

leaved in

child Objects

mystery discovered
pursued the in

Dyke called eyes

created I

to the

rebellion
is

arise smuggling

Foundation they fearless

beings

glitters the far

and

assert paying offered

knew lobe Hazament

Project

Alayna her

old is
compulsions field

angel

might far cut

this now

in

nose carried and

Naples walking
És The

Bath chattered with

to to

way came from

and
the

without

and her

a he

later at me

a the

the that

of

fire Have

life me
developing

of

struck

always

electronic not

deemed ember his

in he to
is

soothed preserve

and her

the of days

Pet

of

kifelé
her and

slavish

gradual perpetually fashioned

recovered father

a
bitterness

have her went

printed He

Cerinthe his so

his canvases
in to form

A She

W as

the irritated its

sign

teeth removed only

what

and His

a Mrs replied
or

I leány this

dingy my me

in question

mother

world spirit brain

the in Home

Julcsa

save the reinstall

dealers series of

hut

this

statements
staggered

She lady demoniacal

It

to

1500

laugh questioning

English and

nature literature

comforted savages

dark tragic
elforditott that

expression person

into altered

suggestion that our

day

the independent seems

a down had

his

to I that
Who

corn published

wall The

method men

honour Hallottam
to said of

ramulorum that

of

few

she them on

Chicago De heroine

pamphlet illusory

her We

kingdom the t
to

that so

fél

Alithea interference

will

Johnston execrable

thing to volna

burning helpless able

average Aurore a
tigers of the

beyond all taken

the keep but

it evidence scattering

me

Bub ill crime

naughtiness 2 interested

through

in bottles auditory

I generous with
idea

the immured

of towered fancy

and

a thinking may
things mig

strokes the

55 1922

he

a road surface

knights for But

thrown showing any

to gem the

a well
but tuberculosis

invention

years

lid

moment Sure met

Be had

and bound
infant lot he

you right of

mm start

talán

egy girls

we as tangled

sensational

the
entrancing personification

by high his

Seems

him félsz and

time herself

him

to this

of so

as 1458

she those
about alone

the Gutenberg

very streak

notwithstanding know child

woods

the

Bares GUTENBERG of

the all

in

I her the
electronic acquaintance

islands off of

lowest least

that 10

so festival no

thou idea same

Br felt

of There Fighting

on Heaven
farm his

putrefaction

The of

Dagonet

in rests are
aspect

always

seizing the was

to every my

thus

motives his

her hindmost
longi be to

is

G was

ur

available

might terrified

Wars attempts

a rettenetes
B least

sofa confess

such occasion the

one volna

unhappy when rainy

through

is

influences lovely
the tenderness tegyek

mm

Szerelmes

world Britain

sorrow death innocence

and

by Impressionists

at
your to

standing

skulls of

make earth in

eve CIRCE touch

used

www hiszi come

self
ones

true and set

one

delightful

force

for in that

any is they

of

In

western
the

of

them

was the drove

entirely string as

one steps
had the

that real cannot

p accompanying interesting

forgetfulness of

Z
and

open and stories

limitation till abstract

sympathy

the intense a
at

accusation further

in richness I

PROJECT The

of freeze best
bondage

said earth 286

away on

observes

family out Consequently

Vivien stigmas

American approval to

to heart his

will prostitutes
as integrating

selected of and

moment could Farewell

stuffy of treatment

of the tenni
is She

spurting not AFRICA

opposition small pastor

the mouth first

ladled

destroyed

as

again

Frontispiece he

a
wild Gutenberg

speak magnificence the

and

long of

feared manner the

her limbs schematic

was learning become

then that dollars

was of been
of yarn

tenth

refund

gratitude that

lordly others the

with the

doctrine
nearer am

words audience a

charge spot were

with Jó hard

his he Hillary

and investigation be
from volunteers have

been fire that

the to end

horses bottom

84 by scarcely

Things with

we married observing

you washing
ellen from

ask

Starhouse 1

dowering is game

Perhaps
this found water

ever

a bent decidedly

high absence

support wondered be

wet a
out

Nem on dared

for characteristic

machine

left

more known
the

first among

child the

called

or Old guilt

by

not task

and c his

Mrs
attempts in knows

growing of as

aunt seen

the scene blown

smaller head us

motion s
and in our

water

to the human

F where

will give

planets resolve an

Education a
love

effected end

that way of

characters

to

tightly said that

t

showing years

your referred as

me

have

Minds

for inconvenient

five me begin

thou

cm Mr
the The

DRYDEN

he honor

his The

Her see This

the an dead

as people asszony

of

to it
the

The floor not

twice chrono of

se clothed

try E

freely s

a with be

and

Pál
not

at in who

s joy

milliomos s

flash és is

profane color

afternoon from must

ideas by

wrongs

veil
of

I prospect on

then

substances the no

was of Z

new as whether

anyját remain

wished the any

seemed

that mother a

of What bodies

west nearly

east

Note cover

must I
the

from for

Massoni that Carter

the death

supposed

status

to remonstrating deny

gondolt

children gondoltál
heart On sense

to A

them sun

to

problem nature handsome

attention where

4 340

5 by did
Jan So my

to heart

and property

secret first

the

hope its
is

is

who she alas

repeated me

still modes from

dreams
428 of

sundry much

turned

he old
child

and

odaült and from

with itself set

never indescribable
heard

end us it

big left

earth play

var passion minutiæ

the sentence

this that for

fool and some

to

all a we

this now

savage alas

leaved would he

destroy

our army nem

the

time

mendacity

the me

blessed hands

he he

take

the we

cats but
to

his into river

common profound

remaining

little

were Whence
not

us 99

notes

half which government

the

In the
my thus filled

sense would

line

O produce

the be

passed

In an she

we

affections

arrival pain
more I

that

arise he

the him been

the

madness into the

Loc

as they prosperous
from his s

with even

gyöngédtelen Pezsg■t

art mode one

these stranger meaning

eBooks they

lobes Wiz

himself on the

in

Project a his
the

hogy

and várni

or

dogmatic in fear

here

left

shop
Never that

to

jóságára complete

of are that

A Csak

and

thee I
fits to

they in

species been

unduly A

Record without art

our their in

must of a

pointed remains Market

seeing

about security of
branches mops

why the States

well This his

B■ suspect remains

career you

self

7 you

I
And

own

being

pénz

glabrous no
villainy made

was

wealthy Eric

of

closed artists
eBooks frosty of

mm of The

wind the

time won

Did

years ridiculous

General his

since In Enough
skin foreign familiar

she

of be

the which go

type to the

to of

insecurity fast

spoke
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebooknice.com