Regardless of the fact that I am using certain texts by Searle, Fer- raris, Smith and De Soto, my intention is not at all to reiterate someone else’s position in my own words, nor is it to question or modify some such position. My intention for now is to, using Ferraris’ theory of the document, affirm the existence of a paradox - one rejected by Searle, but unconvincingly so, I think - regarding the institution (or the institutionalization of the institution). In order to do that, it seems to me that I am forced to slightly disturb both Searle’s and Ferraris’ conception, in attempting to offer my own contribution to a new future theory of the institution.
TY - JOUR
AU - Bojanić, Petar D.
PY - 2014
UR - http://rifdt.instifdt.bg.ac.rs/123456789/197
AB - Regardless of the fact that I am using certain texts by Searle, Fer- raris, Smith and De Soto, my intention is not at all to reiterate someone else’s position in my own words, nor is it to question or modify some such position. My intention for now is to, using Ferraris’ theory of the document, affirm the existence of a paradox - one rejected by Searle, but unconvincingly so, I think - regarding the institution (or the institutionalization of the institution). In order to do that, it seems to me that I am forced to slightly disturb both Searle’s and Ferraris’ conception, in attempting to offer my own contribution to a new future theory of the institution.
PB - Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju
T2 - Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society
T1 - Real Institution. Document and Realism
T1 - Stvarna institucija. Dokument i realizam
SP - 19
EP - 30
DO - 10.2298/FID140201
ER -
@article{
author = "Bojanić, Petar D.",
year = "2014",
abstract = "Regardless of the fact that I am using certain texts by Searle, Fer- raris, Smith and De Soto, my intention is not at all to reiterate someone else’s position in my own words, nor is it to question or modify some such position. My intention for now is to, using Ferraris’ theory of the document, affirm the existence of a paradox - one rejected by Searle, but unconvincingly so, I think - regarding the institution (or the institutionalization of the institution). In order to do that, it seems to me that I am forced to slightly disturb both Searle’s and Ferraris’ conception, in attempting to offer my own contribution to a new future theory of the institution.",
publisher = "Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju",
journal = "Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society",
title = "Real Institution. Document and Realism, Stvarna institucija. Dokument i realizam",
pages = "19-30",
doi = "10.2298/FID140201"
}
Bojanić, P. D.. (2014). Real Institution. Document and Realism. in Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society
Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju., 19-30.
https://doi.org/10.2298/FID140201
Bojanić PD. Real Institution. Document and Realism. in Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society. 2014;:19-30.
doi:10.2298/FID140201 .
Bojanić, Petar D., "Real Institution. Document and Realism" in Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society (2014):19-30,
https://doi.org/10.2298/FID140201 . .
