What is Philosophical Hermeneutics?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 22 тра 2024
- Philosophical hermeneutics as explained through the key concepts of thrownness, prejudice, and listening as developed by the 20th century philosophers Martin Heidegger, Hans-Georg Gadamer, and Paul Ricoeur. This is the sequel episode to "What Is Hermeneutics?".
Philbits is brought to you by Philosophy2u.com.
Host:
Dr Todd Mei
Music:
www.bensound.com
▬ Contents of this video ▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
0:00 Introduction
0:50 Some Historical Background to Philosophical Hermeneutics
3:18 Three Basic Ideas of Hermeneutics (Thrownness, Prejudice, Listening)
4:19 Thrownness
7:45 Prejudice (Pre-understanding)
11:24 Listening
14:10 Conclusion & Recap
Related Links:
What Is Hermeneutics? ( • What Is Hermeneutics? )
Hermeneutics in Real Life (www.hinrl.org)
Farm Aid (www.farmaid.org/blog/ask-farm...)
Oh so clear, thank you
This is unbelievably clear (from bullet points) and in depth (form direct sources). Impressive work!
Thanks!
Uninterrupted listening is the best way of understanding the other person, be it on any subject like spiritual or science. Thanks for the lecture sir.
Thanks!
Thank you so much for this video. I was struggling with hermeneutics and this made the concept much more understandable.
Thank you!
Thanks for your time! Good información!
I loved your explanation! You were so clear and direct! I am studying Hermeneutics for my final exam. Thanks!
Thank you, and good luck with your exam!
Thank you, Sir!
Thank u sir! Awesome!
Excellent.
Thanks!
Congratulations. You master the craft. Keep on! I wonder if you could put the recording of sound a louder, please.
Thanks, Marco. I'll try to get around to editing the sound. I will certainly bear your comment in mind in future videos, as well!
@@philosophy2u Kiitos!
@@philosophy2u
Thanks!!
Sure!
Thanks from Burma
Thank you!
Loved it.. From India
Thanks!
This is fantastic! I have been studying Philosophical hermeneutics for several years and am here to strengthen my "holistic" understanding of the field/relevant works. I am currently working on a thesis right now regarding Gadamer's notion of truth as a "happening" or "event" and would love your advice. I am sure you also know that Gadamer basically argued that socratic dialogue is the only way to "guarantee" truth (final sentence of "Truth and Method") and that scientific method does not. Now, if you're also familiar with Bayesian epistemology, do you think I could describe Gadamer's truth as an emergent phenomenon in terms of probability instead of always assuming it's a sort of "fixed" state? Gadamer was anti-objectivist and of course that's why he's been called a "moral relativist" (I think you already know all the details about that argument). Is it logical to describe the event of truth in terms of probability meaning that, like entropy, if the laws of language and communication (like the laws of Physics) follow a set of rules then the likelihood you get a certain outcome (a certain truth) is extremely high/predictable and thus achieves some degree of "objectivity"? It's loose "objectivity" I know since it is not really objective if it's a probability. Is there any other better way to think about it then?
Thanks, Jay. There is a lot in your comment and reply! If you want to email me for a more detailed follow, you can do so at tsmei@philosophy2u.com.
But for now: I am slightly familiar with Bayesianism, and I should say it is relatively easy to mistake philosophical hermeneutics (PH) as being relativist about things generally. This usually involves misunderstanding how PH applies context to the determination of meaning and how, as your comment notes, the relation to truth relies more on a process of coming to it; though I do not the idea of truth as a happening and event is distinct from a process of the inquirer coming to truth.
I also detect a bit of Heidegger's notion of truth in the Gadamerian approach. My own understanding of how PH conceives of truth draws more on Ricoeur and virtue ethics. In short, Ricoeur distinguishes between scientific verification and the hermeneutic process of validation. Following Gadamer, Ricoeur sees the way the law is interpreted and applied in the juridical setting as the exemplar of this process. Ricoeur makes these comments pace the positivist approach to history. The idea of validation, as I understand it, does sit well with probability, though I don't know how close it is to it. Is an interpretation probable? How can we justify one interpretation over another? And do changing contexts determine this plausibility?
En re virtue ethics: MacIntyre and MacDowell (as well as Ricoeur if he counts as a VE) discuss a different way of understanding moral objectivity that requires historical understanding. The idea here is that pace consequentialism and Kant, moral objectivity cannot be determined in advance by some calculus or reference to a principle or duty. It must be won by understanding, applying, and examining the moral resources of one's tradition (which includes principles, virtues, duties, etc.). So moral reasoning is always underway towards what is morally objective, as opposed to having concluded what it is in advance.
I hope those comments help indicate my view and shed some light on the territory.
Good video.
I have one suggestion and one question:
First the suggestion. Why not look straight into the camera? It would be less distracting.
Now to the question- why isn't St Augustine's methods considered in biblical hermeneutic in your video? He combines Antiochene and Alexandrian methods I would rgue he's one of the first to systematize hermeneutics.. ( And this is ignoring the hermeneutics fo Aristotle and the Platonists)
Thanks for the constructive criticism. I made a few of my videos a few years ago, when at the time there were a lot of "floating head" formats that seemed pretty tired. Also at the time, I had noticed videos where the host looked off-screen. That seemed refreshing (at that time). Suffice it to say, more current videos on this channel are made in a different format.
I limited the scope of this video to the 3 main figures of 20th-century philosophical hermeneutics. I mentioned a bit of Biblical hermeneutics in the "What Is Hermeneutics?" video, but even there I am focused on the roots of philosophical hermeneutics. My research background is in phenomenology and hermeneutics, with a focus on work and economics.
I did think about redoing older videos, but UA-cam does not let you replace videos while keeping the same URL and SEO history. I'd have to delete old videos to replace them. So that is not an option at this time.
Gotta watch out for the distorted hermeneutics of relativistic epistemology!
I'd even go so far as to say that a relativistic epistemology doesn't really engage in hermeneutics.
@@philosophy2u What do you mean by that?
@@JDNicoll only that hermeneutics (as I understand it) recognizes the problems of relativism and tries to include safeguards against reducing to a relativistic view. I think, nonetheless, critics of hermeneutics attempt to argue it is relativistic because it uses context to help determine meaning. Contextual awareness does not necessarily mean being relativistic in a reductive sense, though.
@@philosophy2u Thanks for trying to explain. I was using the term in a general way as any "principle or guideline of interpretation" that someone might put forth. To translate my original comment:
Watch out for the distorted principle(s) (or methodology) of interpretation used in an attempt to say that there is no absolute truth.
What are the suggested questions?
Yes, the ending is not particularly clear. The idea is to pose three questions of a friendly clarificatory/explanatory nature. They can be three distinct questions or they can be related (i.e. follow ups to the response to the first question). Ex. "I'm not quite sure I'm understanding what you mean by X. I get the impression that it involves a, b, and c. Am I right?" "I guess one of the concerns that arises for me is that when you mention X, I think of some worrying examples, like a, b, c. Do you have the same worry?"
What would “hermeneutical phenomenology” be?
That's a good question. Whereas phenomenology examines our experience as it relates to consciousness/perception (Husserl) or bodily presence (Merleau-Ponty), a hermeneutical phenomenology would prioritize how human experience is mediated through language. Paul Ricoeur is probably the most prominent philosopher on this front. His essay "Hermeneutics and Phenomenology" (_Essays in Hermeneutics and Human Sciences, Cambridge University Press) examines the mutual and inevitable relation between the two.
@@philosophy2u Fascinating. I will give it a read. Do you think looking at the original language along with the cultural context of the ancient Israelites is part of the analysis/method of “hermeneutical phenomenology” when it comes to Biblical exegesis? The reason why I ask is because I believe the ancient Hebraic authors believed that the world was flat and had a firmament (raqia) and this can be seen in the Hebrew Bible. The other cultures surrounding it, such as the ancient Egyptians and ancient Mesopotamians, also believed the same thing. I, therefore, believe that the *experiences* of the ancient Hebraic authors can be seen in this cultural setting as expressed in parts of the Hebrew Bible. Essentially, I believe no person (and the texts they write) is created in a vacuum. Does any of this have anything in common with the “hermeneutical phenomenology” approach or am I just seeing things that aren’t there? Thanks
@@jimmyfaulkner1855 , thanks. You put a very complex and interesting question. If I understand you correctly (assuming that the experience of the world as flat is really decisive in your approach), then it would technically be more like a phenomenological hermeneutics. I know this might seem knit-picky. But I think the idea of which I am thinking is looking closely at ancient texts and history (a la typical hermeneutics and Biblical hermeneutics), and then looking at how the experience of the world as flat might in fact change the way we read these texts and histories. Are you planning on doing this as a PhD thesis?
How might hermeneutic principles help us navigate germ war 19 and the sustained information campaign to distort reality in favor of the oligarchs?
Mike, you might find this video particularly interesting: ua-cam.com/video/zDY5vuMW90s/v-deo.html
Hehe meta-hermeneutics