Arquivo para a ‘Information Philosophy’ Categoria
Truth & Method and Inductive Logic
17
Jan
As we have already explained, the revised sketch of The Problem of Historical Consciousness 
after the writing of Truth and Method, the maximal work of Hans-Georg Gadamer, is a good introduction to this work which clarifies many questions of contemporary philosophy: its problem which is clear Among others is its relation to social change, the question of method and especially what is true, but will have no less important minor points, such as dialogue.
Taking up the humanist tradition, he will re-read St. Thomas, St. Augustine and Vico, and clarifies the main problem of the philosophy of our time: “it differs from the classical tradition of philosophy because it does not represent an immediate and uninterrupted continuation of the latter.” Gadamer, 1997, p.35).
He criticizes the instrumentalisation of philosophical thought in the West that made him: whose relations with concepts became “a strange disengagement, whether their relations with these concepts are of the sort of erudite, not to say archaizing, or of the sort of technical manipulation , Which makes of concepts something like tools “(p.36).
He will critique what is called as the sciences of the spirit and will place as transcendent within an aesthetic dimension, denying the context of the logic of Stuart Mill, who claims to have a more correct formulation in the Treatise of Human Nature, and all the misconception of this concept.
He quotes the author J.G.Droysen, a scholar of the history of Hellenism, as an important attempt to give a new sense to history: “that the sciences of spirit should be founded in the same way as an independent group of sciences.” (Page 43).
He points to Stuart Mill’s induction logic, and even criticizes Scherer and Dilthey in stating that even these: “it remains the model of the natural sciences that guides the scientific self-conception of both” (page 44), it is easy to observe the consequences of A model that proposes to be critical of the romantic model, but ends up returning to its own core.
He asserts that even Dilthey came to the conclusion that Helmhotz made, that there is no method for the sciences of the spirit, and that method here: “If the other conditions, under which the sciences of the spirit are, Their way of working, perhaps much more important than inductive logic. “(Page 45)
We can not deny it, after all, Hegel wrote the Phenomenology of the Spirit, and even his critics sought a method to adjust it to historical consciousness, he clarified that the answer they gave “to this question is not enough … follow Kant, for being guided by the concept Of science and of knowledge according to the model of the natural sciences and to seek the striking singularity of the sciences of the spirit in the artistic moment (artistic feeling, artistic induction) “(page 45)
GADAMER, H.G. Truth and Method, London,New York: Continuum, 1975. (pages in Brazilian Edition).
Consciousness between epistemology and method
13
Jan
It is common sense that what we call interpretation is intimately bound up with the
method and worldview that we have, but in practice we stay in the “it’s my opinion.”
Gadamer goes deeper into this theme by saying that “what modern consciousness assumes precisely as ‘historical consciousness’ – a reflective position in relation to all that is transmitted by tradition.” (page 18), that is, “historical no longer beatifically hears the voice that comes to him from the past, but when he reflects on it, he re-places it in the context in which it originated, in order to see the relative meaning and value that are proper to it “(idem) .
And this sentence of interpretation “goes back to Nietzsche, according to which all statements derived from reason” are susceptible of interpretation “(p. 21).
However, he returns to Hegel to clarify that “the human sciences possess with the natural sciences, a link that distinguishes them precisely from an idealistic philosophy: the human sciences also pretend to constitute themselves as legitimate empirical sciences, free from all metaphysical intrusion, and They reject all philosophical construction of universal history (idem), and here we enter into the question of method.
The idea of adopting scientific methods of the natural sciences prevented the human sciences from taking a “radical consciousness of themselves” (idem), and asks at the end of the paragraph: “Why not rather the old Greek concept, Of method should prevail ? “(Page 21)
Aristotle uses this to explain the question of method: “The idea of a single method, which can be determined even before investigating the thing, constitutes a dangerous abstraction, it is the very object that must determine the proper method to investigate it”
The Brazilian translation has 71 pages, is easy and simple to read, and I consider it useful for an introduction to Gadamer’s masterpiece “Truth and Method”.
Hans-Georg Gadamer, “The Problem of Historical Consciousness,” in “H.-G. Gadamer,” special issue, Graduate Faculty Philosophy Journal 5:1, 1975, page number is brazilian edition
Consciência entre a epistemologia e o método
Sabe-se no senso comum que o que chamamos de interpretação está intimamente ligado ao método e visão de mundo que temos, mas na prática, ficamos no “é minha opinião”.
Gadamer vai mais fundo neste tema, ao colocar que “aquilo que a consciência moderna assume precisamente como ‘consciência histórica´- uma posição reflexiva com relação a tudo que é transmitido pela tradição.” (pag. 18), ou seja, “a consciência histórica já não escuta beatificamente a voz que lhe chega do passado, mas, ao refletir sobre a mesma, recoloca-a no contexto em que ela se originou, a fim de ver o significado e o valor relativos que lhe são próprios” (idem).
E sentencia: “esse comportamento reflexivo diante da tradição chama-se interpretação” (pag. 19), e explica que essa noção de interpretação“ remonta a Nietzsche, segundo o qual todos os enunciados provenientes da razão“ são suscetíveis de interpretação” (pag. 21).
Entretanto retorna a Hegel para esclarecer que “as ciências humanas possuem com as ciências da natureza, vinculo que as distingue precisamente de uma filosofia idealista: as ciências humanas possuem igualmente a pretensão de se constituir como legítimas ciências empíricas, livres de toda intrusão metafísica, e recusam toda construção filosófica da história universal (idem), e aqui entramos na questão do método.
A ideia de adotar métodos científicos das ciências da natureza, impediram que as ciências humanas tivessem procedessem a uma tomada de “consciência radical acerca de si mesmas” (idem), e pergunta ao final do parágrafo: “Porque não antes o conceito antigo, grego, de método deveria prevalecer?” (pag. 21)
Utiliza Aristóteles para explicar a questão de método: “a ideia de um método único, que se possa determinar antes mesmo de investigar a coisa, constitui uma perigosa abstração, é o próprio objeto que deve determinar o método apropriado para investiga-lo” (idem).
A tradução brasileira tem 71 páginas, é de leitura fácil e simples, e considero útil para uma introdução na obra prima de Gadamer “Verdade e Método”.
GADAMER, H.G. O problema da consciência histórica, 3ª. Edição. Rio de Janeiro: FGV, 2006.
Better things of life
21
Nov
We continue reading Peter Kreeft, in Socrates’ alleged dialogue with 
Peter Pragma, are now talking about professions, and Peter says:
“PETER: Well, that’s what I’d choose: practical, not theoretical, sciences. Technology
SOCRATES: Right. So far we have mentioned three areas of study for you: business, practical science, or technology, and liberal arts. Do you see what each of them can give you?
PETER: Of course. Business: will bring money, power technology, and liberal arts pain.
They continue the dialogue and later Socrates says:
SOCRATES: And what are the ends for which power and technology are means?
PETER: Making the world a better place to live. Cars, rockets, bridges, artificial organs and Pac-Man.
SOCRATES: So, technology improves the material things of the world.
PETER: Yes, including our own bodies. That’s pretty important, do not you think?
SOCRATES: Oh yes. But I wonder if there should be something even more important to us. If we could improve our own lives, our own actions, our own behavior … “(Kreeft, 2016, 34)
It is not conclusive, but the reasoning is somewhat complete on page 35, where Socrates says about good and good:
SOCRATES: Well, not necessarily “better” in an absolute and unlimited sense, especially if we use “good” and “good” without defining them. … “and continues, but Peter refutes:
PETER: Politics and ethics? Impossible. I want something practical.
We will return to the question of technology in the next topic.
Pages in Brazilian Edition: KREEFT, P. As melhores coisas da vida. Campinas: Ecclesiae, 2016.
Exegesis and Hermeneutics: dichotomies
04
Nov
Any text out of context is critical, but what exactly is the context, which
means the terms in the language of the time it was written and mostly what the exact interpretation that can give him is hermeneutics, since exegesis depends only on the interpretation.
The first great fallacy is that one is of biblical origin, in this case exegesis and other Greek origin fallacy because both are of Greek origin, Exegesis (the ἐξήγησις Greek ἐξηγεῖσθαι “take out”) is an interpretation or critical explanation , although it has the particularity to the religious text, while hermeneutics comes from the Greek “ermēneutikē” which means “science” and “art”, but refers to the god Hermes, who gave rise to language and writing.
If we consider classical antiquity, since hermeneutics is more complete because it means studying the language, literature, culture or civilization in a Historical view in written documents, while not explicitly speak of memory, speech culture and literature.
Already pointed out here that was Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834), in the early nineteenth century, hermeneutics receives one of the goals was to unify the Biblical hermeneutics and law, so called universal hermeneutics, had profound influence on the thought of Dilthey and Heidegger.
Heidegger says that understanding has a “circular structure” from which comes the hermeneutic circle: “Any interpretation to produce understanding, must have understood what is going to interpret” (Heidegger, Martin Being and Time, New York: Harper & Row, 1972).
Wilhelm Dilthey, says the explanation (itself the natural sciences) and understanding (own science of the spirit or human sciences) would be in opposition that is, “clarified through intellectual processes, but we understand the cooperation of all the sentimental forces in the apprehension by dipping the sentimental forces in the object.” (PALMER, Richard Hermeneutics:. Interpretation Theory in Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidgger, and Gadamer Evanston. NUP, 1969).
Paul Ricoeur wants to overcome this dichotomy, for him to understand a text is to chain a new discourse in the text of the speech, because on the one hand there is no reflection without meditation on the signs; on the other, there is no explanation without understanding the world and yourself. (Ricoeur, Paul. Theory of Interpretation, Fort Worth: Texas Christian University, 1976).
The dialogue impossible
15
Sep
In the political field and the scenario that it is presented in national and
international field, remember here Trumph versus Hillary the edge of one of the largest and most impressive witnessed campaigns in American history, a time that Donald Trumph seems like a character out of some banana republic dictators and not a great country.
Lack wisdom, some real rigor and even common sense, but let’s look at it another way, what happens in the knowledge of mankind.
At the edge of the second world war many were the signs of decay and conservative arrogance, but looking thought we could see: the circle of Vienna, but this was the Marburg School passed by Ernest Cassirer, Paul Natorp (1854-1924) and Hermann Cohen (1841-1918) who had published Theorie der Erfahrung, the starting point of this group.
All agreed that the main emphasis was the “theory of knowledge” and therefore will be in the epistemological chain, while elsewhere was reappearing, but with a new hue, ontology through the phenomenology of Edmund Husserl (1859-1938), of where they came from his student Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) and then Paul Ricoeur (1913-2005) and Emmauel Levinas (1905-1995), and many others of course.
What was at stake between the apparent debate between gnoseologies and ontologies, Popper (1902-1994), Lakatos (1922-1974) and Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996) are not the same question about the thought of what is knowledge and science also is in play between ontologies, because since Husserl, I think his teacher Franz Brentano should be evaluated part, to Levinas and Ricoeur, can be thought so, from where the knowledge but of being, and not part of being that is the truth, that is, the question is knowledge, hermeneutics that is metaphysical and scientific, then it is in the three fields, although targeted.
For something thoughtless and totally new, Schleiermacher considering the Bible as a text of historical-literary nature, proposed a method which now serve to elucidate not only the Scripture but also of all the texts that possess this nature, under this influence Hans Georg Gadamer (1900-2002) reexamines Heidegger and proposes the hermeneutical circle, reviewing the pre-concepts, proposes the fusion of horizons and the reading of the author, resurfaces the field of hermeneutics now on linguistics and ontology, new ample space for dialogue.
Cogito wounded and political
25
Aug
Paul Ricoeur is one of the few current French philosophers (died in 2005)
who not only reads and translates from German and English, but also speaks to international currents of thought as diverse as German phenomenology (was translator of Ideas I of Husserl in 1950), to Gadamer’s hermeneutics or the English analytical philosophy and American.
Its flagship book, Soi-même comme un autre (national translation The oneself as another is bad), brought inscribed his beautiful title both on the issue of identity (Soi-même) as his invention of identity through otherness : comme un autre, emphasizing both the metaphorical dimension as well as ethics of this invention, metaphors are in his book: the living metaphor.
Opposing the “exaltation of the Cogito” in Cogito wounded a “broken” (brisé) or “injured” (blessé) as already wrote in the preface to himself as another.
This decline is both the seizure of a much larger unit, even if never totalizable the subject: a unit that is established in every action, in every work, such as the reintroduction of the subject and the world, surpassing the subjects and objects separation.
In politics the cogito injured, is the impossibility (if we are not able to see how Other (comme un autre), the result is a dialogue sometimes confrontational other times of silence, under an even greater suspicion.
Ricoeur distrusts the same tendency to a totalizing hubris and distrusted the Cartesian solipsism, he saw an uncritical application, that is, beyond its limits, the recent anticartesianos paradigms of which hybridity is the worst aspect.
Political dialogue is not hybridity, not composing speeches and exchanges of favors, in a sense, is discussion and clash in another discovery of shared values and thoughts.
Nicholas Carr back load
15
Aug
Critical of the indiscriminate use of technology, Nicholas Carr opened his
speech saying about autonomous vehicles, “I think a lot of views on the overall automation assume that every vehicle will be automated and the whole direction of infrastructure will not only mapped in minutes, but It will also be equipped with the kind of sensors and transmitters and the entire network infrastructure that we need.”, said to ComputerWorld.
New criticism because she had called “Dumbest generation” and in his 2003 book as the Harvard Business Review published the book, “IT Does not Matter” where Carr raised the ire of big names in technology which questions the notion that the iT infrastructure provides strategic advantages to companies.
His new book “Utopia is Creepy: And Other Provocations”, which will the American publisher Norton & Co. on 6 September. It is a compendium of articles, such as “Would Google making us stupid?” And “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of privacy,” now not only young people but all be stupid, imagine what it will mean the Pokemon Go So!
In the interview he says that when his blog was ten years old in 2015, he began to look back through the posts and I realized that many of the items still resounding today, he publishes interesting blog and book just now.
He says he saw what was happening in the world of technology, particularly in the rise of what we used to call Web 2.0 and is now known as social media and social networking, but does show how critical it is in those articles.
He also calls the “ideology of Silicon Valley” the sense that the Internet and social media were breaking down the barriers to personal expression, freeing people and as if we our trust in Silicon Valley and its programmers to lead a kind of Utopia. It is a collection of articles, but with a theme running through it.
Let’s wait for the book, but decidedly Nicholar Carr’s vision is pessimistic.
I have good taste ?
10
Aug
I see in a lot of cars this phrase (in brazilian cars), and I began to wonder
what it would take a large number of people of all social classes, parties and religions to begin to put this in the car, I asked a few people and the response was not convergent.
I remembered again the book is not finished in Theodore Dalrymple holidays: “Our culture … or what’s left of it,” which states that political, economic and cultural factors began to destroy our culture … or what’s left of it.
Thought is an unconscious but important reaction because something is bothering us as much as injustice (theft, corrupt, abuses, etc.) and the economic crisis.
Our notion of aesthetics and beauty seems changed, not just the one that selects colors and races, but in any race or color what really means the beautiful and the good.
The question of aesthetics is linked to contempt for the poetic, the imagery (and imaginary) and more deeply the concept of lost aesthetic since the beginning of modernity, this requires a deeper study of what we think of everyday life: a harmony to (in ) Being.
