Hans-Georg Gadamer, 'On the Origins of Philosophical Hermeneutics'

Exposition and commentary by a philosophy professor.

[KristinaPetersenKarlsson]

Thank you! I really enjoyed listening to your talk! I was not so interested in Gadamer before. Now I am!

[Ehersman]

I agree with Gadamer's accentuation of the importance of dialogue and the reliance communality has on the linguistic constitution of our world. Gadamer emphasizes the importance of experience, and its role in establishing a common knowledge of the world, leading to a common consciousness. I found it particularly interesting when Gadamer asserted that philosophy's generalizations within the modern sciences have made us blind to the task of finding a common language, a common mode of expression. In this sense, to Gadamer, philosophy seems to be ceaseless in its demand to understand the structure of the world, yet it does not possess the linguistic influence to convey effectively the truth that it seeks, especially in the historical distance. Simple logical conclusiveness is not everything, Gadamer, contends, and the thematization of logic limits the horizon of questions and therefore removes the ability to discern the emergence of the world that congenitally occurs in a linguistically formulated experience of the world. Gadamer seems to be contending that it is imperative to recognize the possible shortcomings and correctness of an opposing conversation partner's position, as well as an opposing theory's position. This, in turn, instantiates the art of thinking and allows one to extend beyond the simple-minded acceptance of ideas, and conduct a thorough analysis of the content of certain perceptions and theories.

[samiraghasemi]

That was very very useful. Thanks a lot 🥰🥰🥰

[nupursethi]

i request you to please publish an article on philosophical hermeneutics.

[jasonbarton]

Gadamer's conception of the "rational subject" capable of engaging in authentic dialogue (i.e., willing to fuse horizons with another interlocutor) seems unrealistic, idealistic, and utopian. In the polarized political situation of American politics, for instance, the idea of fusing horizons with someone else or communicating political beliefs across partisan lines appears more and more impossible everyday. Does Gadamer account for ideological barriers to situating oneself within the Open of disclosure, revelation, or unconcealment? Interpretation has significant potential to be skewed by pre-existing beliefs, prejudices, and biases toward others. How does Gadamer incorporate these problems of "understanding" within his hermeneutics?