Resilience: Some Philosophical Remarks on Defining Ostensively and Stipulatively
Författare
Summary, in English
Although contentious, the concept of resilience is common in sustainability research. Critique of the concept have often focused on the content of the concept. In this paper we focus on another feature of concepts, namely how they are defined. We distinguish between concepts that are ostensively defined, that aim to point to some phenomena, and stipulatively defined concepts, where the content of the concept is given in the definition itself. We argue that although definitions themselves are similar across many different disciplines where resilience is used?most notably psychology and ecology?they differ in how. This has interesting consequences for how different disciplines can be connected and integrated. Notably, integration on basis of ostensively defined concepts turn on sharing the extension (the phenomena itself) of the concept, but not necessarily the intension (the definition), whereas integration on basis of stipulatively defined concepts work in the opposite way.
Avdelning/ar
Publiceringsår
2015
Språk
Engelska
Sidor
64-74
Publikation/Tidskrift/Serie
Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy
Volym
11
Issue
1
Fulltext
- Available as PDF - 171 kB
- Download statistics
Länkar
Dokumenttyp
Artikel i tidskrift
Förlag
Proquest
Ämne
- Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
- Philosophy
Nyckelord
- interdisciplinarity
- sustainability science
- resilience
Status
Published
Projekt
- LUCID - Lund University Centre of Excellence for Integration of Social and Natural Dimensions of Sustainability
Forskningsgrupp
- LUCID - Lund University Centre of Excellence for Integration of Social and Natural Dimensions of Sustainability
ISBN/ISSN/Övrigt
- ISSN: 1548-7733