scholarly journals ГЕРМЕНЕВТИКА Х.-Г. ГАДАМЕРА ЯК ФІЛОСОФІЯ МОВИ

2020 ◽  
pp. 60-64
Author(s):  
Дубініна Віра Олександрівна
Keyword(s):  
Religious Discourse ◽  
Theoretical Assumption ◽  
Instrumental Approach ◽  
Historical Discourse ◽  
Linguistic Turn ◽  
Sequential Development ◽  
Artistic Experience ◽  
Single Process ◽  
Philosophical Doctrine ◽  
Linguistic Philosophy

The sequential development of H.-G. Gadamer philosophical doctrine of language as the basis of its philosophical hermeneutics. The various stages of representations of the language are analyzed in connection with the criticism of the instrumental approach and understanding of the language as the foundation of historical discourse and poetic creativity. The latter is considered as the pre-reflexive basis of the language, a fundamental expression of its essence. Moreover, artistic experience is presented as a procedure for knowing the truth, to the extent that this experience contains understanding, it itself is a hermeneutical phenomenon.The linguistic turn, which marked one of the turning points in the development of modern philosophy, led to the formulation of a fundamentally new question about the essence of language. We are, of course, not talking about some kind of planned event or about any single process that coincides in its characteristics, or is something close to different philosophical directions. It is difficult to say how correctly it is to compare interest in language within the framework of linguistic philosophy and the phenomenological school, in the framework of which the development of hermeneutics took place.The latter, from a method that was essentially intended to serve historical-philological and religious discourse, hermeneutics has evolved into an independent philosophical discipline that reflects the very essence of metaphysical issues. First of all, this change is connected with the development of the phenomenological tradition, and especially with the works of M. Heidegger, who was able to free hermeneutics from the excessive influence of theories of language and to base it on metaphysical inquiry. This, of course, does not mean that the language itself has been given to philosophical oblivion; it is only a matter of changing the accents and research attitudes.This task, in our opinion, was set and largely solved by H.-G. Gadamer, in any case, if we accept his theoretical assumption about the transcendence of the meaning of the interpreter.Gadamer interprets the hermeneutic phenomenon very broadly, in which he sees the integral unity of the three aspects – understanding, interpretation and application. Gadamer argues for their inseparability, an actual identity: understanding is always an interpretation and always implies an application of what is to be understood. The concept of application in Gadamer outlines the limits of the phenomenon to be interpreted and establishes the fact that all phenomena of spiritual culture in a particular situation must be understood differently.

scholarly journals They Tore God Limb From Limb

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Katlyn Kichko
Keyword(s):  
Sixteenth Century ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Catholic Church ◽  
Religious Discourse ◽  
Singular Case ◽  
Historical Discourse ◽  
Counter Reformation ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Catholic Church

This paper interacts specifically with two separate texts, that is Michel de Certeau’s The Possession at Loudun and Carlo Ginzburg’s The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a Sixteenth Century Miller. Both of these texts present a narrative of religious turmoil, demonic possessions and a heretical Inquisition, respectively, and the events which surround a single religious dissenter. Examining the two heretical men presented within these texts in comparison allows for an understanding of Catholic Church dogma during the age of the Counter Reformation, and how such an institution managed threats, both external and internal. Moreover, this paper also examines the methodologies behind the historical discourse, in order to understand the validity of the narratives presented, and the scope of historical depth sought. Addressing methodology is crucial when one narrows focus to two singular case studies by two separate historians. Thus, this paper intends to illustrate the threats to normative religious discourse which Urbain Grandier and Menocchio possessed in the face of the Catholic Church, while also demonstrating the methodologies by which the two men are presented within their respective histories.

“Language” and “discourse”: Two perspectives on linguistic philosophy

Semiotica ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 (224) ◽  
pp. 295-312
Author(s):  
Yongxiang Wang
Keyword(s):  
Western Philosophy ◽  
Linguistic Turn ◽  
Direct Collision ◽  
Linguistic Philosophy

AbstractWith the establishment of modern linguistics and the linguistic turn of western philosophy, various linguistic theories have been advanced and have given different interpretations to language and discourse. Different schools of thought have witnessed a direct collision of ideas and a deep academic dialogue between the theory of translinguistics advanced by the great master of dialogism, Bakhtin, and the outlook on language of the father of modern linguistics, Saussure.

scholarly journals А.C. Danto and P. Ricœur: Narrative as a Tool of Historical Knowledge

2018 ◽  
pp. 143-159
Author(s):  
B. L. Gubman
Keyword(s):  
Philosophy Of History ◽  
Logical Positivism ◽  
Historical Knowledge ◽  
Analytical Philosophy ◽  
Knowledge Resources ◽  
Linguistic Turn ◽  
The Past ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Linguistic Philosophy

The article comparatively analyzes A.C. Danto’s and P. Ricœur’s theories of historical narration. Ricœur’s synthetic assimilation of Danto’s views is interpreted as a characteristic phenomenon of the dialogue between hermeneutics and analytical philosophy, and in a broader perspective – of contemporary European continental and Anglo-American philosophical traditions. The version of the analytical philosophy of history developed by Danto is interpreted as being formed in the course of overcoming epistemological program of logical positivism under the impact of a platform of linguistic philosophy, pragmatism and neo-pragmatism as well as F. Nietzsche’s perspectivism and the ideas of existentialism. The articles examines fundamental conclusions of Danto’s “descriptive metaphysics” of history, which influence his understanding of a number of epistemological factors and ontological assumptions specific for the theory of historical narration. At the late stage of the evolution of his philosophy of history, Danto spoke of a radical challenge to his views on the part of T. Kuhn’s theory, but he did not give to it a constructive answer. Despite the significant philosophical differences, a number of Danto’s historical narration theory’s theses became acceptable for Ricœur, especially in the light of the American colleague final confession that knowledge of the past is dependent on the kind of existential presence in history specific for a human being. Taking M. Heidegger’s and H.G. Gadamer’s ideas as a basis of his approach to narration problem, Ricœur considered also important the “linguistic turn” initiated by L. Wittgenstein. Offering a positive evaluation of Danto’s analysis of history language, Ricœur simultaneously rightly criticized him for his neglect of the formal instruments of organizing of narrative – plot, intrigue, and composition that should affect the knowledge resources and testify on the unity of narration features in history and fiction as well.

The Ship of Logic on the High Seas of Discourse

2019 ◽  
pp. 53-104
Author(s):  
Ken Hirschkop
Keyword(s):  
Public Sphere ◽  
Ludwig Wittgenstein ◽  
Analytic Philosophy ◽  
Bertrand Russell ◽  
Gottlob Frege ◽  
Linguistic Turn ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Public Sphere ◽  
Linguistic Philosophy ◽  
High Seas

Chapter 3 looks at the linguistic turn in analytic philosophy as it emerges from Gottlob Frege, gains momentum in Bertrand Russell, and finds elaboration in the early and middle work of Ludwig Wittgenstein. The characteristic move of linguistic philosophy will be the clarification of presumably ‘muddled’ ordinary statements: the bringing to the surface a lucidity that is lurking within language, needing only to be coaxed out. The author shows how in the works of Frege, Russell, and early Wittgenstein, the drive to clarity entails a stripping away of every intersubjective, rhetorical element in discourse. He then argues that a language clarified by professional philosophers is a substitute for the objectivity of the public sphere. The chapter concludes by showing how intersubjectivity returns first as irony in Wittgenstein’s Tractatus and then as the belief that language always ‘works’: that it fails only when external circumstances disturb its inner workings.

scholarly journals Hermeneutics of Aristotle and Hermeneutics of Sophists in Terms of Dialogue Philosophy. Part II. From Sophists to Modernity

2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-120
Author(s):  
Ilya Dvorkin
Keyword(s):  
Modern Philosophy ◽  
Analytical Philosophy ◽  
Linguistic Turn ◽  
Modern Thought ◽  
Philosophy Of Dialogue ◽  
The Difference ◽  
New Formulation ◽  
Modern Analytical ◽  
Philosophical Doctrine

The article considers the logical and philosophical doctrine of sophists, which, according to some modern researchers, was more philosophical than their ancient critics recognized. A comparison of the provisions of Aristotle's hermeneutics with preserved fragments of Protagoras and Gorgias shows that the doctrine of sophists was a kind of holistic philosophy, which anticipated the philosophy of dialogue of the XX century. Despite the fact that the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle tried to overcome the relativism and anti-ontologism of the doctrine of sophists, some elements of its dialogism were preserved in subsequent philosophy in dialectics and rhetoric. The first thing you should pay attention to is the difference between the dialogical form of the presentation of philosophy in Plato and dialogue as the fundamental basis of thinking that we find among sophists. The dialogism preserved in the dialectic of Plato and the rhetoric of Aristotle is more a technical method of convincing the interlocutor than a hermeneutical basis, which it is in the philosophy of dialogue and in the method of Socratic discussion. The linguistic turn that occurred in the philosophy of the 20th century includes not only an increased interest in language and accuracy of expression. No less important is the new formulation of the question of the nature of the language. Is language a tool for the formulation of thought as Aristotle believed and followed by representatives of modern analytical philosophy, or does it have its own fundamental status, as representatives of the philosophy of dialogue believe? In this context, it is very important for the philosophy of dialogue to find in the thinking of the pre-Socratics those predecessors who already charted the paths for modern thought two and a half thousand years ago. The second part of the article discusses the forms of the dialogic thinking that have survived in philosophy after the sophists and the role of the sophists' hermeneutics in the formation of modern philosophy of dialogue.

Linguistic turn

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans-Johann Glock ◽  
Javier Kalhat
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
Vienna Circle ◽  
Ordinary Language ◽  
The United States ◽  
Empirical Science ◽  
Language Philosophy ◽  
Linguistic Turn ◽  
Outright Rejection ◽  
Linguistic Usage ◽  
Linguistic Philosophy

The term ‘the linguistic turn’ refers to a radical reconception of the nature of philosophy and its methods, according to which philosophy is neither an empirical science nor a supraempirical enquiry into the essential features of reality; instead, it is an a priori conceptual discipline which aims to elucidate the complex interrelationships among philosophically relevant concepts, as embodied in established linguistic usage, and by doing so dispel conceptual confusions and solve philosophical problems. The linguistic turn originated with Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (1921). In the 1920s and early 1930s, the logical positivists deepened the turn through their outright rejection of metaphysics; in line with their scientific outlook, they also sought to merge it with ‘ideal language philosophy’. The linguistic turn was developed in a different direction by the later Wittgenstein and ‘ordinary language philosophers’ after him. While no less hostile to metaphysics than the positivists, they rejected the suggestion that philosophical problems can be solved by reforming rather than clarifying our existing language. Linguistic philosophy began to wane from the mid-1970s onwards, largely as a result of the rise of naturalism in the United States. In recent years, however, there has been a rehabilitation of conceptual analysis and thereby of a type of linguistic philosophy. The term ‘the linguistic turn’ was coined by Gustav Bergmann, a one-time member of the Vienna Circle, and was later used by Richard Rorty as the title for an influential anthology of essays on ‘the most recent philosophical revolution’.

scholarly journals Hermeneutics of Aristotle and Hermeneutics of Sophists in Terms of Dialogue Philosophy. Part 1

2020 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 480-501
Author(s):  
Ilya Dvorkin
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
Analytical Philosophy ◽  
Linguistic Turn ◽  
Modern Thought ◽  
Philosophy Of Dialogue ◽  
The Difference ◽  
New Formulation ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Modern Analytical ◽  
Philosophical Doctrine

The article considers the logical and philosophical doctrine of sophists, which, according to some modern researchers, was more philosophical than their ancient critics recognized. A comparison of the provisions of Aristotle's hermeneutics with preserved fragments of Protagoras and Gorgias shows that the doctrine of sophists was a kind of holistic philosophy, which anticipated the philosophy of dialogue of the XX century. Despite the fact that the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle tried to overcome the relativism and anti-ontologism of the doctrine of sophists, some elements of its dialogueism were preserved in subsequent philosophy in dialectics and rhetoric. The first thing you should pay attention to is the difference between the dialogical form of the presentation of philosophy in Plato and dialogue as the fundamental basis of thinking that we find among sophists. The dialogueism preserved in the dialectic of Plato and the rhetoric of Aristotle is more a technical method of convincing the interlocutor than a hermeneutical basis, which it is in the philosophy of dialogue and in the method of Socratic discussion. The linguistic turn that occurred in the philosophy of the 20th century includes not only an increased interest in language and accuracy of expression. No less important is the new formulation of the question of the nature of the language. Is language a tool for the formulation of thought as Aristotle believed and followed by representatives of modern analytical philosophy, or does it have its own fundamental status, as representatives of the philosophy of dialogue believe? In this context, it is very important for the philosophy of dialogue to find in the thinking of the pre-Socratics those predecessors who already two and a half thousand years ago charted the paths for modern thought. The first part of the article analyzes the relationship between Aristotles hermeneutics and hermeneutics of sophists.

Why the Jewish State Now?

2011 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 23-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raef Zreik
Keyword(s):  
Discourse Analysis ◽  
Jewish Identity ◽  
Religious Discourse ◽  
Jewish State ◽  
Historical Discourse ◽  
Gradual Evolution

Israel's raison d’être was as a Jewish state, yet for almost four decades after the 1948 declaration of its establishment its Jewishness was not inscribed in any law. This essay, a structural-historical discourse analysis, seeks to explore what led up to today's insistent assertion of the state's Jewish identity. To this end, the author traces Israel's gradual evolution from its purely ethnic roots (the Zionist revolution) to a more civic concept of statehood involving greater inclusiveness (accompanied in recent decades by a rise in Jewish religious discourse). The author finds that while the state's Jewishness was for decades an assumption so basic as to be self-evident to the Jewish majority, the need to declare it became more urgent as the possibility of becoming “normalized” (i.e., a state for all its citizens) became an option, however distant. The essay ends with an analysis of Israel's demand for recognition as a Jewish state, arguing why the Palestinian negotiators would benefit from deconstructing it rather than simply disregarding it.

Conceptions of Trust in the Qur'an

2011 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 56-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nora S. Eggen
Keyword(s):  
Social Trust ◽  
Social Ethics ◽  
Religious Discourse ◽  
Human Being ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Normative Claim ◽  
Trust Relationship ◽  
Trust Relationships ◽  
The Absolute ◽  
The Guardian

In the Qur'an we find different concepts of trust situated within different ethical discourses. A rather unambiguous ethico-religious discourse of the trust relationship between the believer and God can be seen embodied in conceptions of tawakkul. God is the absolute wakīl, the guardian, trustee or protector. Consequently He is the only holder of an all-encompassing trusteeship, and the normative claim upon the human being is to trust God unconditionally. There are however other, more polyvalent, conceptions of trust. The main discussion in this article evolves around the conceptions of trust as expressed in the polysemic notion of amāna, involving both trust relationships between God and man and inter-human trust relationships. This concept of trust involves both trusting and being trusted, although the strongest and most explicit normative claim put forward is on being trustworthy in terms of social ethics as well as in ethico-religious discourse. However, ‘trusting’ when it comes to fellow human beings is, as we shall see, framed in the Qur'an in less absolute terms, and conditioned by circumstantial factors; the Qur'anic antithesis to social trust is primarily betrayal, ‘khiyāna’, rather than mistrust.

Panhelėninio tapatumo konstravimas klasikiniame graikų istoriniame diskurse

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Alius Jaskelevičius
Keyword(s):  
Classical Period ◽  
Historical Discourse

Construction of Panhellenic Identity in the Greek Historical Discourse of the Classical Period

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document