Recap each philosopher’s main view about consciousness/the self/personal identity. Explain at least one
difference between the two philosophers’ views and state which view you prefer. Then, offer an argument (i.e.,
evidence) against the view that you reject.
What were their main concepts and definitions, what were their distinctions? How did they imagine that the self
was different from the brain or different from the mind? Restate their theory and include “direct quotes”, specific
references from their work.
Explain carefully how these views compare and contrast. Be sure to identify and explain at least one difference
between the philosophers’ views. How do they define a key concept or make a major distinction differently?
Words Cited Page – cite all quotations/paraphrases used by naming the author of the work, the tile and the
chapter/section that you are citing from.
Properly use MLA in-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quoting
Signified and signifier
Syntagm and systems
Denotation and connotation
Language and Speech
Barthes (1964) enforced the concepts of language, or the part of the Semiological system which is consented upon by society, and speech, or the individual choice of symbols, to Semiological systems. The application of these concepts can be supplied to the Semiological study of the food system. According to Barthes (1964), someone is free to create his/her own menu, using personal choices in food mixtures, and this will become their speech or message. This is done with the overall national and social structures of the language of food mind. Barthes (1964) then spread on Saussure’s terms, by explaining that language is not really socially determined by the masses, but is sometimes decided by a certain minute group of persons, somewhat changing the correlation of language and speech. Barthes (1964) exact that a Semiological system can importantly exist in which there is language, but little or no speech. In this case, Barthes (1964) was of the believe that a third element called matter, which would provide signification would need to be added to the language/speech system.
Signifier and Signified
The signified was a representation of a concept, while the signifier was used to represent the sound-image of that concept. Barthes (1964) points out that the importance of both the signified and the signifier is the correlation that exists between them; it is within this relationship that sense is arrived at. “… that the words in the field derive their meaning only from their opposition to another (usually in pairs), and that if these oppositions are preserved, the meaning is unambiguous” (Barthes, 1964, p. 38). Out of the correlation, the sign is created. Saussure (1959) indicated the sign to be arbitrary in nature, initially based on the relationship between the signified and signifier. Barthes (1964) explained that the sign cannot be arbitrary forever when Semiological systems are conceived. Instead, Barthes shows that once sign assumes a role or use, it will earn its meaning along the line. The sign can definitely misplace its capricious in nature and become actuated (Barthes, 1964).