Gadamer and Aristotle. Problems of a Hermeneutic Appropriation

IF 1.1 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY JOURNAL OF THE BRITISH SOCIETY FOR PHENOMENOLOGY Pub Date : 2022-05-13 DOI:10.1080/00071773.2021.1997551
Panagiotis Thanassas
{"title":"Gadamer and Aristotle. Problems of a Hermeneutic Appropriation","authors":"Panagiotis Thanassas","doi":"10.1080/00071773.2021.1997551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT\n When Gadamer elaborates his conception of philosophical hermeneutics as a transcendental inquiry, he appeals to Aristotle’s practical philosophy as a “model”, which can elucidate his own conceptualization of understanding as intrinsically bound to the specific circumstances of every interpretation. The explicit formulation of the analogy between Aristotelian ethics and philosophical hermeneutics provides a framework that clarifies Gadamer’s principal intention; it also reveals some of the crucial tensions inherent in the Aristotelian conception of practical philosophy and its relation to praxis and phronêsis. In the 1970s, however, Gadamer suggests a practical transformation of hermeneutics, claiming for it the role of an “heir of the older tradition of practical philosophy”. Against Gadamer’s late “turn”, construed as a deviation from the initial analogy, I defend Aristotle’s practical philosophy as an exemplary model for philosophical hermeneutics, but I also maintain that the two projects pursue distinct epistemic goals.","PeriodicalId":44348,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF THE BRITISH SOCIETY FOR PHENOMENOLOGY","volume":"53 1","pages":"335 - 351"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF THE BRITISH SOCIETY FOR PHENOMENOLOGY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00071773.2021.1997551","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT When Gadamer elaborates his conception of philosophical hermeneutics as a transcendental inquiry, he appeals to Aristotle’s practical philosophy as a “model”, which can elucidate his own conceptualization of understanding as intrinsically bound to the specific circumstances of every interpretation. The explicit formulation of the analogy between Aristotelian ethics and philosophical hermeneutics provides a framework that clarifies Gadamer’s principal intention; it also reveals some of the crucial tensions inherent in the Aristotelian conception of practical philosophy and its relation to praxis and phronêsis. In the 1970s, however, Gadamer suggests a practical transformation of hermeneutics, claiming for it the role of an “heir of the older tradition of practical philosophy”. Against Gadamer’s late “turn”, construed as a deviation from the initial analogy, I defend Aristotle’s practical philosophy as an exemplary model for philosophical hermeneutics, but I also maintain that the two projects pursue distinct epistemic goals.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
伽达默尔和亚里士多德。解释学挪用的问题
当伽达默尔将他的哲学解释学概念阐述为一种先验的探究时,他呼吁亚里士多德的实践哲学作为一种“模式”,这可以阐明他自己的理解概念化,因为它与每一种解释的具体情况有着内在的联系。亚里士多德伦理学和哲学解释学之间的类比的明确表述提供了一个框架,澄清伽达默尔的主要意图;它还揭示了亚里士多德的实践哲学概念及其与实践和phronêsis的关系中固有的一些关键紧张关系。然而,在20世纪70年代,伽达默尔提出了解释学的实践转变,声称它是“实践哲学旧传统的继承人”的角色。反对伽达默尔后期的“转向”,被解释为偏离了最初的类比,我捍卫亚里士多德的实践哲学作为哲学解释学的典范,但我也坚持认为,这两个项目追求不同的认识目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Husserl’s Notion of Solitary Speech Reconsidered: In Conversation with Vygotsky What Makes Natural Language “Natural”? A Phenomenological Proposal Infinity, Ideality, Transcendentality: The Idea in the Kantian Sense in Husserl and Derrida Sartre on Action: Decentring the Will Ontologically Interactive Painting: On Susan Rothenberg’s Three Heads
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1