Pages

Monday, April 27, 2020

Intention and attention: Intension, extension, and “attension” of a notion or set


Prehistory and background:
Philosophical phenomenology starting from Brentano and Husserl introduced (or restored from scholastic philosophy) the conception about intentionality of consciousness. Especially Husserl being a mathematician in education and early carrier linked that fundamental and definitive property of consciousness to the essence of mathematical cognition by means of the concept of “epoché”: Indeed, mathematical cognition remains open the problem whether the described and investigated objects exist or not. In other words, mathematical cognition is invariant to and thus independent of the existence (“reality”) or non-existence of its objects.
Thus attention turns out to be dual to the phenomenological “intention” in a sense: It postulates its objects as real independently of whether they exist or not. So, the attention and intention constitutes a dual pair in dependence whether the objects at issue are declared as real or not (here “not” does not mean for them to be declared as unreal or nonexisting, but that they might be real or unreal).
Then one can speak of “attention” as the reverse operation to “epoché”: The latter takes or removes reality, and the former gives or adds reality. Thus attention being inherently linked to the problem of reality turns out to be a fundamental philosophical concept rather than only a psychological one. For example, if the operation of that philosophical “attention” is applied to any intention, one would obtain the corresponding “idea” or “eidos” (i.e. appearance as a whole) in a Platonic sense, i.e. as “reell”.     
Furthermore, “intention” has another counterpart, “intension” in logic, mathematics, epistemology, and cognitive science. Intension is what is able to constitutes unambiguously a separated unit such as a notion, set, image, or any unit of cognition by a finite definition, i.e. by a finite set of bound variables interpretable as the logical constant of that unit. An extension as the collection of objects, each of which satisfies the definition at issue, corresponds to any intension possibly as an empty one if the definition is contradictory. The collection may include as existing as nonexisting individuals. 
Thesis:
One can introduce the concept of “attension” as to any unit enumerated above, e.g. as to a notion. It means both all individuals of the extension as existing and their wholeness as existing, too. Thus “attension” is relative to “intension” and “extension”, on the one hand, and to the Platonic “idea” and “eidos”, on the other hand. Furthermore, “attension” can be defined as the application of the “philosophical attention” to any explicit or implicit (e.g. contextual) intension.
Attension complements intension to the pair of both biggest and least element of the mathematical structure of lattice extended from the intention of consciousness to the idea therefore giving both logical and ontological structure of the notion or whatever else unit. That structure orders

the extension in question in a potential taxonomy (i.e. classification of genera and species), the biggest element of which, i.e. the idea of the thing defined by the extension or even that thing itself or by itself, is generated just by the philosophical attention as the corresponding attension. 

On the contrary, if the notion or unit is supplied as usual by any logical or ontological structure, thus its attension is implicitly certain, too.   
A few main arguments:
1 Philosophical phenomenology establishes an inherent link between: (a) logic and mathematics; (b) philosophy; (c) psychology: The link relates the three by means a kind of transcendental idealism in the German philosophical tradition, which Husserl called “solipsistic” in some his works. Thus a bridge for transfer and reinterpretation between notions of psychology, logic and mathematics is created under the necessary condition for those concepts to be considered as philosophical as referred to that kind of transcendental subject.
2 The initial research of Husserl about The psychological Foundation of Arithmetic (1890) leaded him to opposite conclusion in the later Logical Investigations (1900-1901), namely that psychology (and further philosophy) should be underlain rather by logic and mathematics. In fact, the initial base of that synthesis can be found even in Ancient Greece in Pythagoreanism, in the origin itself of philosophy, and a little later, in Plato’s doctrine and Euclid’s geometry. The German idealism including the subject and mind as a fundamental philosophical category had been what allowed of Husserl to add psychology in that huge synthesis.
3 The link in question is grounded in the way of cognition in logic and mathematics, philosophy, and the seen in thus psychology rather than in any reference to reality, to experienced or experimental data for the reality itself should be inferred in particular by the new approach of phenomenology: This suggests for reality not to be presupposed, but to be “bracketed” initially.
4 Indeed, logic and mathematics do not connect the concept of truth, in their framework, to any confirmation by external reality. Therefore, they do not presuppose any reality, and their cognition is independent of reality as a hypothesis or premise. As to philosophy, it ought not to presuppose reality for the reality itself is its main problem (Heidegger underlay the problem of being as a deeper one). At last, psychology should not be referred to reality as far as its object of research is just that being which seems to be opposed to and thus separated from reality, namely mind and psychics (Heidegger refuted this, the latter, and Husserl blamed him for “naturalization”).
5 Thus logic & mathematics, philosophy, and psychology need and would share a relevant method of research, which should be independent of the hypothesis (or axiom) of reality. In particular, that method cannot be experimental or ground on any experience in reality.
6 Logic and mathematics as the most advanced ones in that kind of cognition can suggest its extended model and interpretation where “intension” would correspond to “intention”, and “extension” to some area of reality relevant to that intension at issue.
7 Then “attension” is the “extension” with reality added secondarily as far as reality cannot be presupposed in phenomenological research.   






The presentation also as a PDF or a video; furthermore as slides @ EasyChair       

No comments:

Post a Comment