NEUTROSOPHIC SOCIO-DISCOURSIVENESS: FROM CEREMONIAL TO INCERTITUDE

Georgiana Camelia Stanescu
Additional contact information
Georgiana Camelia Stanescu: University of Craiova

Social Sciences and Education Research Review, 2022, vol. 9, issue 2, 175-183

Abstract: This study represents an implementation of neutrosophy in the field of verbal communication (discourse). The methods used include meta-analytical, comparative, and inductive techniques. In relation to the neutrosophic criterion (F. Smarandache), as well as to the way of thinking (Vattimo G & Rovatti P-A, 1998), we can distinguish two types of discourse: the ceremonial and the impositive discourse. In Gianni Vattimo's opinion (1998), there are two types of thinking: weak and strong thinking (weak and strong thought). The ceremonial discourse is based on weak thinking, and it has a high neutrosophic coefficient. The impositive discourse lies on strong thought and contains a low neutrosophic coefficient; this type of discourse embodies two forms: argumentation (the reasoning) and the demonstration. Starting from different directions, both types of discourse come close to the validation of knowledge, more precisely to what is true and what is false. This study puts forward the fact that the evidence, the demonstration, and the argumentation stand for discoursive aids that can consolidate a space of the critical opinion and of the neutrosophic incertitude or a space of silence, according to the degree of eligibility and imposition.

Keywords: neutrosophy; discourse; ceremonial discourse; impositive discourse; argumentation; demonstration (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Z0 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://sserr.ro/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/sserr-9-2-175-183.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:edt:jsserr:v:9:y:2022:i:2:p:175-183

DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10053409

Access Statistics for this article

Social Sciences and Education Research Review is currently edited by Stefan Vladutescu

More articles in Social Sciences and Education Research Review from Department of Communication, Journalism and Education Sciences, University of Craiova
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Dan Valeriu Voinea ().