A PHILOSOPHICAL PERSPECTIVE ON GENERIC ××œ×”×™× IN THE HEBREW BIBLE IN RELATION TO THE CLASSICAL THEORY OF CONCEPTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25159/1013-8471/2814Abstract
Contemporary analyses of ××œ×”×™× as generic concept tend to be based on psychological theories of concepts. This article, by contrast, attempts to show what a philosophical analysis of the concept of generic ××œ×”×™× in the Hebrew Bible is concerned with when approached from the perspective of the classical or definitionist view of conceptual structure. However, rather than offering a conceptual analysis of generic ××œ×”×™× in any given context, the discussion features a general meta-conceptual overview of the classical theory and the pros and cons of applying it to the concept in question.Metrics
References
Botterweck, G J and Ringgren, H (eds.) 1974. Theological dictionary of the Old Testament. Volume 1. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans.¬
Burnett, J S 2001. A reassessment of biblical Elohim. Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars Press.
Earl, D 2005. Classical theory of concepts, The. No pages, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available: http://www.iep.utm.edu/conc-cl/. [Accessed 2013/10/12].
Fodor, J A 1998. Concepts: where cognitive science went wrong. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/0198236360.001.0001
Gericke, J W 2009. What is an ×ל ? A philosophical analysis of the concept of generic godhood in the Hebrew Bible, Old Testament Essays 22/1:20-45.
Jackson, F 1998. From metaphysics to ethics: A defence of conceptual analysis. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Jenni, E & Westermann, C (eds.) 1994. Theologisches Handwörterbuch zum Alten Testament (THAT). 2 Bde. München: Chr. Kaiser Verlag.
Machery, E 2009. Doing without concepts. New York: Oxford University Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195306880.001.0001
Margolis, E and Laurence, S 2012. “Conceptsâ€, no pages, in Zalta 2012:n.p.
Margolis, E and Laurence, S (eds.). 1999. Concepts: core readings. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.
McClellan, D O 2013. You will be like the gods: the conceptualization of deity in the Bible in cognitive perspective. Unpublished Masters Dissertation. Trinity Western University.
Moore, G E 1966. Lectures on philosophy. Lewy, C (ed.). London: Humanities Press.
Murphy, G L 2002. The big book of concepts. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/1602.001.0001
Peacocke, C 1992. A study of concepts. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press. Plato 1961. The collected dialogues of
Plato. Ed. Edith Hamilton and Huntington Cairns. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Prinz, J J 2002. Furnishing the mind: concepts and their perceptual basis. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3169.001.0001
Pyysiäinen, I 2005. “God: A brief history with a cognitive explanation of the concept.†No pages. Available: http://www.talkreason.org/articles/god.pdf [Accessed 21/11/2013]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33356/temenos.4803
Quine, W V O 1953/1999. “Two Dogmas of Empiricismâ€, in Margolis and Laurence 1999:153-170.
Ringgren, H 1974. s.v. “××œ×”×™× Ê¾elÅhîmâ€, in Botterweck and Ringgren 1974:267-284.
Rosch, E 1999. Principles of categorization, in Margolis and Laurence 1999:189-206.
Schmidt, W H 1994 s.v. “×Ö±×œ×”Ö´×™× â€ in Jenni & Westermann 1994:331-347. Smith, E E and Medin, D L 1981. Categories and concepts. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Smith, M S 2001. The origins of biblical monotheism: Israel’s polytheistic background and the Ugaritic texts. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/019513480X.001.0001
Van der Toorn, K 1999. s.v. “God 1†in van der Toorn et al. 1999:911-919.
Van der Toorn, K, Becking, B and van der Horst, P W (eds.) 1999. Dictionary of deities and demons in the Bible. Second Edition. Leiden: Brill.
Wardlaw, T R 2008. Conceptualizing word for “God†within the Pentateuch: A cognitive-semantic investigation in literary context. New York: T&T Clark.
Weiskopf, D 2009. The plurality of concepts, Synthese 169:145–173. Zalta, E N (ed.) 2012. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Available: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2012/entries/concepts/ [Accessed 2013/10/11] DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9340-8
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
