The conceptual lexicography that has been elaborated throughout history runs the risk of identifying history of philosophy with doxoscopy and of ideally reducing the history of problems to an abstract inventory of immutable questions. Probably, the combination of the two perspectives allows to solve a couple of empirical problems: the fact that concepts are not simply listed in a more or less up to date inventory of terms; and the fact that problems are not simply an abstract and invariable structure which is not influenced by the cultural environment of a given age. History always shows the strong and close connection between problems and concepts, to the extent that the flexibility or the nuance of a concept will always affect a change in the content. This requires applying ontology to the building of a relational database, where concepts and problems are tied together in a structure of relationships which is open and which can be empowered. The concept of field, which has already been outlined by Joachim Ritter, seems to show several solutions to such problem.
|Translated title of the contribution||[Autom. eng. transl.] Field concept and problem history|
|Title of host publication||Eine Typologie der Formen der Begriffsgeschichte in «Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte», Sonderheft 7. vol. 7|
|Editors||RICCARDO POZZO, MARCO SGARBI|
|Number of pages||15|
|Publication status||Published - 2010|