Philosophy of Conceptual Network

Bernard Korzeniewski

Faculty of Biochemistry, Biophysics and Biotechnology, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland.

DOI: 10.4236/ojpp.2014.44050                

Abstract

The article formulates the philosophy of a conceptual network and defines a concept as a unit of meaning. According to the proposed idea, the substance of our mind (subjective psyche) is constituted by a conceptual network which is composed of continuous concepts which have meanings through connotation. The conceptual network is an epiphenomenon of the neural network that is based on a dynamic structure of a complex of neurons interconnected in a functional way. Language is a secondary phenomenon in relation to the conceptual network: the words of language correspond to the best-distinguished concepts, and their meaning is determined by their conceptual “lining”. The conceptual networks of logic, mathematics and, especially, philosophy are not perfectly determined and specified. The “Absolute Truth” not only does not exist, but in fact it does not have any sense. (Self-)consciousness emerged as a result of recurrent self-reference of the neural/conceptual network.

Keywords

Concept Network, Meaning by Connotation, Language, Epistemology, Absolute Truth

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Barrow, J. D. (1992). Pi in the Sky. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[2]	Hawking, S. W. (1988). A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes. New York: Bantam Books.
[3]	Hume, D. (2007). A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford: Clarendon Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1522/25022634
[4]	Kant, I. (1999). Critique of Pure Reason. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[5]	Korzeniewski, B. (2010). From Neurons to Self-consciousness. How the Brain Generates the Mind. Amherst: Prometheus Books.
[6]	Korzeniewski, B. (2013a). Formal Similarities between Cybernetic Definition of Life and Cybernetic Model of Self-Consciousness: Universal Definition/Model of Individual. Open Journal of Philosophy, 3, 314-328. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojpp.2013.32049
[7]	Korzeniewski, B. (2013b). Magic of Language. Open Journal of Philosophy, 3, 455-465. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ojpp.2013.34067
[8]	Mach, E. (1976). Knowledge and Error. Dordrecht: Reidel. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1428-1
[9]	Penrose, R. (1990). The Emperor’s New Mind. Concerning Computers, Minds and the Laws of Physics. London: Vintage.
[10]	Piaget, J. (1955). The Language and Thought of the Child. New York: Meridian Books.
[11]	Russell, B. (1905). On Denoting. Mind, 14, 479-493. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mind/XIV.4.479
[12]	Russell, B. (1908). Mathematical Logic as Based on the Theory of Types. American Journal of Mathematics, 30, 222-262. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2369948
[13]	Russell, B. (1975). My Philosophical Development. New York: Simon and Schuster.
[14]	Whitehead, A.N. & Russell, B. (1910-1913). Principia Mathematica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[15]	Wittgenstein, L. (1961). Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. New York: Humanities Press.
[16]	Wittgenstein, L. (1999). Philosophical Investigations. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.