Philosophy Stuff Pod Gadamer Flashcards
What two strands was G trying to navigate between?
Positivism - only science has the answer and historicism - relativism
What were G’s influences? Expanded by GPT
Hans-Georg Gadamer (1900–2002) was deeply influenced by several major figures in Western philosophy, particularly Plato, Aristotle, Hegel, Husserl, Heidegger, and the hermeneutic tradition. His philosophical hermeneutics, articulated in Truth and Method (1960), emerged as a response to and development of their ideas.
Plato and Aristotle shaped Gadamer’s views on dialogue, ethics, and practical wisdom (phronesis). He engaged extensively with Plato’s dialectical method, seeing dialogue as the foundation of philosophical inquiry. Aristotle’s concept of phronesis influenced Gadamer’s belief that understanding is not a purely theoretical activity but one rooted in practical, situated reasoning within historical traditions.
Hegel contributed to Gadamer’s historical consciousness, particularly the idea that understanding is a dynamic, historically mediated process rather than a neutral or objective act. Hegel’s dialectical approach and his concept of history as an unfolding of absolute spirit influenced Gadamer’s notion of the “fusion of horizons” (Horizontverschmelzung), which describes how meaning emerges through the interaction of different historical perspectives.
Edmund Husserl, the founder of phenomenology, also shaped Gadamer’s thought, though Gadamer was ultimately critical of Husserl’s approach. Husserl’s method of epoché (bracketing presuppositions) aimed to establish a pure, presuppositionless knowledge. Gadamer, however, rejected the idea that one could fully step outside historical and cultural influences. Nonetheless, Husserl’s emphasis on intentionality—the idea that consciousness is always directed toward something—contributed to Gadamer’s insistence that understanding is always engaged and situated within a particular context.
Martin Heidegger was perhaps Gadamer’s most direct and profound influence. Heidegger’s existential phenomenology, particularly his concept of Dasein (being-there) and the idea that understanding is not just an intellectual act but a fundamental mode of being, laid the groundwork for Gadamer’s hermeneutics. Heidegger’s critique of objectivity and emphasis on the historicity of human experience strongly influenced Gadamer’s rejection of a methodological, scientific approach to understanding.
Gadamer also engaged with the hermeneutic tradition, especially Friedrich Schleiermacher and Wilhelm Dilthey. Schleiermacher saw hermeneutics as a method for reconstructing an author’s original intent, while Dilthey sought to ground the humanities (Geisteswissenschaften) in a scientific methodology. Gadamer, however, argued that understanding is never a mere reconstruction of the past but always shaped by tradition, language, and historical context.
Through these influences, Gadamer developed his philosophical hermeneutics, emphasizing that understanding is dialogical, historically situated, and always evolving. His work stands as a major response to modern epistemology, arguing that truth is not fixed but emerges through the interplay of perspectives across time.
How did art come into it?
G thought art could disclose knowledge about human condition. Kant had also thought there was an objectivity to art.
What was G relationship with Hegel?
G was a sort of soft Hegelian - without all the metaphysics
What was G trying to do?
Put a ring around the whole of knowledge. Saw areas as overlapping. He didn’t as many did see the point if pushing knowledge until it broke by like Foucault with postmodernism for example. Saw some types of knowledge as being disclosed by method and some not. Positivists had wanted all knowledge disclosed by method or say it is gibberish.
Truth and method or truth or method?
In some ways he was saying in many respects that it was truth or method - there was not always a method to truth
What about Shakespeare?
He would have derided the idea that there was nothing to learn from Shakespeare
What did Aristotle say about knowledge that he would have agreed with?
Should not push certain types of knowledge further than they can go
