Chapter 4.1: The hermeneutic circle
Вставка
- Опубліковано 19 чер 2024
- This video is part of the series: 'The Philosophy of the Humanities' which you can find here ua-cam.com/users/playlist?list...
For more videos on Philosophy by Victor Gijsbers go to:
ua-cam.com/channels/xdW.html...
Intromusic: "Styley" by Gorowski: (www.wmrecordings.com/tag/gorow...)
Great explanation, thanks. Unlike a few others here, I found it very pleasant that you took your time speaking. Made it easier to understand.
Fantastic explanation and the measured, deliberate speaking gave me time to really consider each sentence. Thank you for this.
I watched the video and then I read the comments. When I watched the video again I understood it better.
Interpretation
0:32 Difference in Natural Science
0:50 “Humanities study products of human mind”
1:07 Questions
1:59 The Hermeneutic Circle
2:26 “Meaning is determined by the whole as a whole, not by the parts individually”
2:34 Example of Holism
3:16 Tastiness
3:56 Meaning is even more holistic than taste.
9:56 Media Offline
Thank you so much, Michael.
This is an absolutely EXCELLENT synopsis of a construct that is described vaguely (at best) in the literature. Thank you!
Excellent - straightforward, unambiguous and uncomplicated.
Thank you so much. I have litteraly been sitting for 2 hours reading thru 20 pages on this and not gotten it down, but with this video you have really helped me understand the concept.
Thank you for making this available. It's a great intro to what can be a bit cryptic.
Thank you so much for this clear explanation! Keep on doing this! More power to the team!
For anyone going frame by frame trying to work it out, at 9:56, the red screen reads 'media offline' in several languages.
But what does it mean?
Nicely done! Thanks for your clarity and pace.
Wow! Thankyou for all the thought and effort you put into this series, to make such complex concepts seem within reach. I'm sure if I try to go look up the same thing on my own, I won't be able to grasp it unless I persist and deal with the initial discomfort. But that's such a pity because just being familiar with the concept is wonderful, and broadens the mind for future connections. Thankyou for making this possible.
Brilliant!! Thank you so much for the absolutely simple and clear explanation!
This helped me a lot! The pace is just perfect for me as it gives me time to really think about what is being said. Thank you!
This series is awesome! It's helped me from Argentina. Greetings!
This is the best explanation of Hermeneutics on UA-cam
Excellent lecturer/script! Easy to understand.
Magnificent speaker. Thank you for this lucid explanation.
Excellent explanation. Means a lot for a beginner like me. Thank you and God bless your efforts!
Thank you, that was the best explanation of HC I have ever got :)
Excellent and deals with basics
Marvellous clear explication.
Do you have a book??? I will definitely add your book to my collections if you've written one. Your teachings are very clear and easy to follow. Thank you.
Helpful video! Thanks
Thanks for your succinct elucidation.
There is also the problem of over interpretation, i.e.adding more context based on our own preferences or even bias, beyond what the writer originally intended. But we would never know that.
What is your thought on this?
This is wonderful.
lifesaver! thank you
very clear explanations
Easy explanation, thanks!
A great explanation, an even greater shirt.
All Ur lectures are par excellence.
Great explanation, thanks!
Great explanation without talking in circles
I think I get it. The purpose is to get a better understanding of what the author (artist, etc.) intended to communicate when he/she created the work that you are studying, and when we increase the context, we increase the understanding. I suppose one can never arrive at a complete understanding because we can never be the person who created it, but it is an interesting and useful concept nonetheless.
This helped me to write my course work more than 3 books😭
Thanks 😍❤️
At some point in the past when we did not know the science of volcanic eruptions, people did see meanings in them - like God's signal maybe. Since we now know the mechanism we call it an event and feel that there is no meaning in volcanic eruptions. So, can it be that all such meanings are a signal of limited or inadequate understanding?
Excellent explanation
Thanks so much
Great video. Thanks.
Great explanation!
7:00 Shakespeare wrote a beautiful speech about honour in Henry IV part 1 spoken by the legendary Falstaff.
Excellent! in a circular way...
I think it's even more excellent in a spiral way, wink
Excellent .
I love Gijsbers I wish he'd make more of this; I would never have to read again
But with hermeneutics you still will
I listened repeated . I found clarity of concepts
Thank you very much!
Good work.
regarding "is there a perfect interpretation": theoretically if we arrive at the author's interpretation, and then we could interpret the author within a larger context and so give a larger meaning to _their_ interpretation of their own work. The *perfect* interpretation would surely have to be that which brings you back to the beginning haha
Great.. Thank you..
Thank you sir!!
Thank you very much for ur lecture.
excellent video
Very good, thank you
Thank you.
Great!
relly good work
Thank you
It's just fine. Not too short or too long
thanks mate!
Would hermeneutic scholars then think that its only worth studying texts of death authors, since we could simply ask a living author what he or she meant by what she wrote?
Thank you :)
Lead research strategy across different verticals for corporates and VCs (content partnerships, curated research, newsletters, social media) - Interface for sales strategy with Sales/BDR and CSM teams - Interface with product and data to enhance sector-specific insights
I swear I saw this guy at Woodstock.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it, does it make a noise?
Thinking about the last thought - you could know you have nothing new to learn from going around the circle if your thoughts at the start of an iteration and at the end of an iteration are the same. Of course this is more computational / mathematical approach to the concept since people usually don't read like machines and sometimes it takes reading the same passage multiple times before we get something. Even then outside context can change the reading. So if you were like a physicist or working with fuzzy logic, you'd probably conclude that you are done reading something when the change inbetween iterations is small enough that it's not worth doing another iteration.
I think flavour is a more accurate word than taste... Taste typically refers to sweet, sour, salty, bitter, spicy, whereas flavour is the multitude of different smells
An apple falling from a tree means that life is ending, the apple will eventually rot and die. The apple falling means that death exist
Life saver
Thank you so much!!!!!!! ^_^
I find it funny that on a video about hermeneutics that many of these comments are some of the worst examples of the application of hermeneutics.
Holism, Contextualism, Pragmatics, Semantic Minimalism, Meaning, Hermeneutics. Herneneutic interpretation=Recanati? as opposed to input-output semantic minimalist account?
this guy is a goat
Couldn't the hermeneutic circle be better characterized as the "hermeneutic back-and-forth," or the the "hermeneutic spiral"?
Around 10:00 there's a slight Adobe Premier gap :D
sharply observed ;)
The hermeneutic circle? Would a hermeneutic polygon be more accurate?
Particularly challenging where people write ambiguously.
Holism: Emergence, but with meaning
The underlying assumption is that the original author had a clear idea about what his/her words mean. In reality most people are rather fuzzy on the meaning of a lot of the concepts that we use. Also, as soon as a bit of time has passed since the text was authored, a lot of the context is lost to the erosion of time. Things aren't written down and people forget. In short: We will never know exactly what Shakespeare mean with the word honor, and it is not only for the reasons stated in the video. In fact the man himself may only have had an approximate, fuzzy definition of the word in his head when he wrote it.
nice
9:56
I just came back after reading the original text by Rorty and now watching this video makes it more clear.
Where is this University? I am learning a lot from your videos.
Ancient university in the Netherlands.
omg Manny from Black Books has swallowed small wise book.
clicked for the shirt, stayed for the
data 😁🤓
Humanities study products of the human mind, which, unlike natural occurrence (hurricane forming, volcano erupting, lightning striking), do have meanings that move the humanities to work; the meaning of the whole is not simply the sum of its parts; words as having no determinate meaning apart from their context, like the word 'can'; the meaning of the word is not simply the sum of its parts, i.e., its phonemes and its morphemes, but rather it has meaning both as a result of those units and as a result of its context, like how it functions in the sentence as a part of speech, a noun or auxiliary verb or an adjective, for example; sentences only have a determinate and specific meaning in a larger context; the context that determines something meaning is unlimited, which means; we may never know for sure that we have gotten to the right interpretation of what the author originally meant; we can go ever round the hermeneutic circle
My notes :D
😂😂😂😂😂 that shirt tho !!!!
How do you know if something is truly natural? The Japanese Earthquake - suppose it was "created" by the United States ... it would then "mean" something. How do you know that it means something?
9:56 what is this?! A Hideo Kojima Lecture!?
Imagine all the people...
Du bist cool.
im here from mario 64 iceberg
Isn't it wrong to declare that natural events don't mean anything? For example, the fall of an apple in a society that rejects gravity could very well mean to revolt against the status quo. I argue that all things have meaning because meaning itself is constructed by people and societies.
Damn intellectuals
At 5:25ish. How does he come to the conclusion that "can" means "a promise to" in the email example; and a "boast" in the running example?
Explicitly "can" means capable of. The person in the email example is 1. Explicitly stating that she is capable of sending the email ; and perhaps implying that she will. However, in our modern day environment there is no seasoned supervisor that wouldn't follow up in the "I can" response with "please send it today by xxx time"
In the same vein, a runner who explicitly states, "I can" run it is not boasting but speaking truth--that he is capable of running it within that specified time. To speak truth is not boasting. If it turns out that he is not capable by means of evidence then he was not speaking truth in the first place.
Just my initial thoughts...
Yes, but what the speaker is intending to convey with the word is different. In each sentence, the speaker is trying to convey a different thing. The same word that means 'being capable of' describes different meanings depending on the context. What you've described is this contextual information.
Now instead of a word in a sentence, think about a sentence in a whole text. How do you describe the contextual information then?
Interesting shirt
Not atomistic but reductionist.
9:55 has missing content
Subliminal message at 9:55.
Fucking live saver, need to hand in my thesis 23:00... but the methodologie was a cluster fuck XD
SUFFERING