Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
organized around the three main taxonomic domains, [Object “Doxastic culture”],
[Object “Scientific culture”] and [Object “Technical culture”];
- finally, the vocabulary which depends on the root conceptual term [Object
“Culture of transcendence”] enables us to describe subjects devoted not only to
religious systems and movements but also to so-called popular beliefs, to all forms
of “spontaneous” beliefs of a group, or indeed to that category of heterodoxic beliefs
which, depending on the case, we term “sect” beliefs, heresy, etc.
We can clearly see that the boundaries between these three domains of analysis
are blurred. After all, a doxa naturally tends to establish itself as a norm for all those
who believe in it (“believe” is used here in the sense of a fiduciary relation, a
relation of trust said to be primary, spontaneous or non-reflected [GRE 79; RIC 83])
and who turn it into a dogma in the quasi-religious sense. These cognitive forms are
indistinct in the sense that they almost-indissociably mix epistemological,
axiological and fiduciary (belief) aspects. In order to get a handle on them, the
analyst can describe them as secondary symbolic systems (without further
specifying them in relation to such-and-such a more restricted conceptual domain).
Figure13.19. Thetaxonomicdomainwhoserootisthe
conceptualterm[Object“Artculture”]
Let us now look at Figure 13.19. This shows an extract of the branch whose root
term is [Object “Art culture”]. This term opens up the taxonomic domain of the third
group identified above which, along with the group of transversal cultural objects
and cultural objects from the social world, comprise the branch [Secondary symbolic
object]. For the time being, within this third group, we have distinguished the more
specific taxonomic domains composed of conceptual terms using which we can
Search WWH ::




Custom Search