Sign as he is always reliable or, or probable, should find its own space inside knowledge. In the XVI century, was of the opinion that things are endowed with signs in order for people to be able to reveal their secrets, their nature and their virtues; but this discovery meant only the ultimate viability of characters, the justification of their existence; it meant their best and definitely the best use. However, the signs did not need to be known to exist: even if they remained dumb and if no one ever did not take them, they didn't lose anything in your existence. Not the knowledge, and the language of things claimed signs in their signifying function. Since the XVII century the entire area of the sign is distributed between reliable and probable; in other words, here already there is no place unknown mark, no dumb mind not because people like to own all possible signs, but because the sign is there so far as known the possibility of substitution relationships between two already known elements. The sign doesn't expect passively coming who can know: it is always is constituted only by the act of cognition. This is where knowledge breaks off its old kinship with divination (divinatio). Divination had always assumed the signs that preceded him: so that the knowledge entirely was placed in the gaping open or confirmed or secretly passed character. In his task was the identification of language previously entered by God into the world; it is in this sense due to the significant implications it is prophesied, and it prophesied o divine (divin). Now sign starts or mean only inside knowledge; namely his sign now borrows its certainty or its probability. And if God still uses signs to speak to us through through nature, he is thus our knowledge of and relationships that are established between impressions to to establish in our mind the relation values.
Sign as he is always reliable or,
ReplyDeleteor probable, should find its own space inside knowledge.
In the XVI century, was of the opinion that things are endowed with
signs in order for people to be able to reveal their secrets, their
nature and their virtues; but this discovery meant only
the ultimate viability of characters, the justification of their existence;
it meant their best and definitely the best
use. However, the signs did not need to be
known to exist: even if they
remained dumb and if no one ever did not take them, they
didn't lose anything in your existence. Not the knowledge, and the language of things
claimed signs in their signifying function. Since the XVII century
the entire area of the sign is distributed between reliable and
probable; in other words, here already there is no place unknown
mark, no dumb mind not because people like to own
all possible signs, but because the sign is there
so far as known the possibility of substitution relationships
between two already known elements. The sign doesn't expect
passively coming who can know: it is always
is constituted only by the act of cognition.
This is where knowledge breaks off its old kinship
with divination (divinatio). Divination had always assumed
the signs that preceded him: so that the knowledge entirely
was placed in the gaping open or confirmed or secretly
passed character. In his task was the identification of language
previously entered by God into the world; it is in this sense
due to the significant implications it is prophesied, and it
prophesied o divine (divin). Now sign starts
or mean only inside knowledge; namely his sign
now borrows its certainty or its probability. And
if God still uses signs to speak to us through
through nature, he is thus our knowledge of
and relationships that are established between impressions to
to establish in our mind the relation values.