Performative contradiction
A performative contradiction occurs when a self-description and the associated meaning or idea directly contradicts the action or state of the person making the statement, i.e. when the statement and the implied action or mode of existence cannot match.
Examples
" I'm sleeping deeply now! "
“It's like when someone uttered the act of speaking: 'I'm sleeping deeply now.' By uttering this sentence, he proves that he is not sleeping. Because already by the execution of the utterance he contradicts its content. Such an 'existential inconsistency', which arises from the mere execution of a speech act, is called a performative contradiction. "
" I have no body! "
“The negation of the utterance 'I have a body' is (...) a performative contradiction. Because I already need the larynx to make this statement . "
" I don't exist! "
“When I think that I don't exist, I think something that contradicts what I must assume. This is not a logical contradiction because the thought of 'I don't exist' is not inherently contradicting. Rather, it contradicts another statement, namely the statement 'I exist' and I have to assume the truth of this statement when I think 'I do not exist'. This is also called a 'performative contradiction', a contradiction in action. "
Pfister introduces the performative contradiction as an unsuccessful “ transcendental argument ” in which the condition of the possibility of a statement is plausibly given compared to the performative contradiction. As a positive example, he cites the famous dictum of the French philosopher René Descartes “ I think, therefore I am ”.
classification
A performative contradiction as a contradiction between statement and implied existence thus stands in classificatory terms between the logical contradictions of statements and the contradictions in reality, the so-called “dialectical” or real contradictions . Transcendental arguments and performative contradictions in their, as in the examples, rather trivial form "play almost no role in everyday life and in other sciences (...)." In political and ethical discourses, on the other hand, self-descriptions as "good", "exemplary", "community-oriented", "democratic" etc. as well as their relation to the actual behavior of an agent are a main topic of discussion; but neither transcendental conclusions nor contradictions can usually be derived directly from these utterances, but require empirical data that are also interpreted differently from different points of view.
literature
- Rafael Ferber : Philosophical Basic Concepts Volume 2, Munich: Beck 2003, 276 S., ISBN 3-406-494-625
- Ekkehard Martens / Herbert Schnädelbach (ed.): Philosophy. Ein Grundkurs, Volume 2, 7th edition Rowohlt 2003, 828 pages, ISBN 3-499-55457-7
- Jonas Pfister: Tools of Philosophizing, Stuttgart: Reclam 2013, 291 S., ISBN 978-3-15-019138-5
- Holm Tetens : Philosophical Argumentation. An introduction, 3rd unchanged edition Munich: Beck 2010, 311 pp., ISBN 978-3-406-60935-0
Individual evidence
- ↑ Rafael Ferber: Basic Philosophical Concepts . tape 2 , p. 97 f .
- ↑ Jonas Pfister: Tools of Philosophizing . S. 98 .
- ↑ Holm Tetens: Philosophical Argumentation. An introduction . S. 68 ff .
- ↑ Longer explanation of this in: Holm Tetens, Philosophisches Argumentieren. An introduction, p. 68 ff.
- ↑ Jonas Pfister: Tools of Philosophizing . S. 97 .