视野的融合:真正的伦理对话的可能性

IF 0.2 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY Pub Date : 2022-07-03 DOI:10.1080/02580136.2022.2086741
Erdal Yılmaz
{"title":"视野的融合:真正的伦理对话的可能性","authors":"Erdal Yılmaz","doi":"10.1080/02580136.2022.2086741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article seeks the possibility of a genuine ethical dialogue based on Gadamer’s notion of a “fusion of horizons”. For Gadamer, the human being is blessed with the unique ability to understand, and understanding is modelled on the act of conversation in which we engage with others. The fact that different points of view of dialogue partners merge in the process of understanding leads them to a better and mutual understanding, which is a fusion of horizons. For some of Gadamer’s critics, in the fusion, the more dominant horizon assimilates the other, which is why Gadamer’s notion of understanding seems to be unethical. To avoid this misinterpretation of the process of understanding, I will interpret Gadamer’s notion of understanding as the fusion of horizons based on his analysis of the concepts of “dialogue” and “play” (Spiel). By doing that, I aim at showing that Gadamer’s notion of the fusion of horizons is a dynamic process and that the latter requires an “openness” of participants to each other, which leads their encounter toward a genuine ethical dialogue.","PeriodicalId":44834,"journal":{"name":"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY","volume":"41 1","pages":"229 - 239"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The fusion of horizons: The possibility of a genuine ethical dialogue\",\"authors\":\"Erdal Yılmaz\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02580136.2022.2086741\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article seeks the possibility of a genuine ethical dialogue based on Gadamer’s notion of a “fusion of horizons”. For Gadamer, the human being is blessed with the unique ability to understand, and understanding is modelled on the act of conversation in which we engage with others. The fact that different points of view of dialogue partners merge in the process of understanding leads them to a better and mutual understanding, which is a fusion of horizons. For some of Gadamer’s critics, in the fusion, the more dominant horizon assimilates the other, which is why Gadamer’s notion of understanding seems to be unethical. To avoid this misinterpretation of the process of understanding, I will interpret Gadamer’s notion of understanding as the fusion of horizons based on his analysis of the concepts of “dialogue” and “play” (Spiel). By doing that, I aim at showing that Gadamer’s notion of the fusion of horizons is a dynamic process and that the latter requires an “openness” of participants to each other, which leads their encounter toward a genuine ethical dialogue.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44834,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"229 - 239\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02580136.2022.2086741\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02580136.2022.2086741","RegionNum":3,"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

摘要

本文在伽达默尔的“视野融合”概念的基础上寻求真正的伦理对话的可能性。对伽达默尔来说,人类有着独特的理解能力,而理解是建立在我们与他人交谈的行为之上的。对话伙伴的不同观点在理解过程中融合在一起,这使他们能够更好地相互理解,这是一种视野的融合。对于伽达默尔的一些批评者来说,在融合中,更占主导地位的地平线同化了另一个地平线,这就是为什么伽达默尔对理解的概念似乎是不道德的。为了避免这种对理解过程的误解,我将在分析“对话”和“游戏”概念的基础上,将伽达默尔的理解概念解释为视野的融合(Spiel)。通过这样做,我的目的是表明伽达默尔的视野融合概念是一个动态的过程,后者需要参与者相互“开放”,这将使他们的相遇走向真正的道德对话。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The fusion of horizons: The possibility of a genuine ethical dialogue
This article seeks the possibility of a genuine ethical dialogue based on Gadamer’s notion of a “fusion of horizons”. For Gadamer, the human being is blessed with the unique ability to understand, and understanding is modelled on the act of conversation in which we engage with others. The fact that different points of view of dialogue partners merge in the process of understanding leads them to a better and mutual understanding, which is a fusion of horizons. For some of Gadamer’s critics, in the fusion, the more dominant horizon assimilates the other, which is why Gadamer’s notion of understanding seems to be unethical. To avoid this misinterpretation of the process of understanding, I will interpret Gadamer’s notion of understanding as the fusion of horizons based on his analysis of the concepts of “dialogue” and “play” (Spiel). By doing that, I aim at showing that Gadamer’s notion of the fusion of horizons is a dynamic process and that the latter requires an “openness” of participants to each other, which leads their encounter toward a genuine ethical dialogue.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: The South African Journal of Philosophy (SAJP) is the official publication of the Philosophical Society of South Africa. The aim of the journal is to publish original scholarly contributions in all areas of philosophy at an international standard. Contributions are double-blind peer-reviewed and include articles, discussions of articles previously published, review articles and book reviews. The wide scope of the South African Journal of Philosophy makes it the continent''s central vehicle for the publication of general philosophical work. The journal is accredited with the South African Department of Higher Education and Training.
期刊最新文献
Two faces of control for moral responsibility African Metaphysics, Epistemology, and a New Logic: A Decolonial Approach to Philosophy The idea of rights in the African thought scheme The good Dogs are still in the Portico: Making sense of the cynic-stoic moral and sociopolitical continuities Violence as a technological concept
×
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