English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Contemporary discussions over the cognitive value of literature focus on analysing the way in which literature and philosophy come close in addressing a specific class of concerns: those distinctively related to the human position and human experience in the world. In light of some stylistic methodological differences between the two practices – clear and precise language of philosophy and philosophy’s focus on abstraction and objectivity vs. semantically dense language of literature accessory to conveying that which is emotional and subjective – it is often argued that the truth pertains to the domain of philosophy and deception to the domain of literature. I take that to be wrong and misrepresentative with respect to two things: philosophy’s capacity to foster understanding and literature’s overall cognitive value. To support my claim, I first show that philosophy’s traditional methods of addressing human concerns are insufficient for the task and I then move on to explaining how literature can be cognitively valuable and better equipped to shed light on some of these concerns. I end by refuting arguments which deny literature’s capacity to engage with philosophical problems.

On Literary Cognitivism from the Perspective of Difference between Literature and Philosophy