| 1. |
- Odenstedt, Anders
(författare)
-
Art, History, and the Decline of Tradition
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Gadamer on Tradition. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783319595566 - 9783319595580 ; , s. 33-62
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Gadamer argues, in a prescriptive way, that the rise of the historical sciences coincided with a regrettable decline in the authority of the Western philosophical, religious, and aesthetic traditions. But Gadamer also argues, in a more descriptive way, that the history of Western culture since Greek antiquity fundamentally involves a number of uninterrupted traditions, or even a single uninterrupted tradition. Gadamer’s account of modern aesthetics and art shows a similar ambiguity. Gadamer argues, in a prescriptive way, that modern aesthetics and art are regrettably plagued by an “aesthetic consciousness” (ästhetisches Bewußtsein) that reduces the creation and reception of art to mere aesthetic play and that breaks with tradition. But Gadamer also argues, in a more descriptive way, that, ultimately, even the most esoteric modern artists retain a dependence on tradition.
|
|
| 2. |
- Odenstedt, Anders
(författare)
-
Being a Child of One’s Time : Gadamer and Hegel on Thought and Historical Context
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Gadamer on Tradition. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783319595566 - 9783319595580 ; , s. 191-216
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter compares Hegel’s and Gadamer’s accounts of context-dependence. Hegel asserts that the individual is a “child of his time.” However, Hegel describes the relationship between thought and the historical context in different ways, and this chapter singles out four versions of the claim that the individual is a “child of his time” and of the historical context. Parallels to these claims can be found in Gadamer, and where such parallels are absent this can be explained by the difference between Hegel’s and Gadamer’s views of Bildung as third nature. Hegel is part of the reaction by the emerging science of history against the Enlightenment tendency to blame past historical epochs for contingently failing to live up to contemporary standards of rationality. Gadamer shares this reaction, although at the same time arguing that Hegel regrettably continues certain Enlightenment modes of thought.
|
|
| 3. |
- Odenstedt, Anders
(författare)
-
Conclusion
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Gadamer on Tradition. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783319595566 - 9783319595580 ; , s. 217-221
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Gadamer asserts, in a passage that I have already quoted, that contextually induced presuppositions “occupy the interpreter’s consciousness” and that they are not at “free disposal.” This claim might be understood as saying that these presuppositions cannot be discarded. If this interpretation is correct, the claim perhaps says that one must use them without being able to shed them altogether but that one need not uncritically affirm them in so doing. However, this interpretation is not obvious insofar as one may rather understand the claim that presuppositions “occupy the interpreter’s consciousness” as saying that they are uncritically affirmed. The claim may even be understood as saying that they are to some extent unconscious. A further complexity here is that there are different ways of understanding the scope of awareness and critique of presuppositions. Even if all presuppositions cannot be simultaneously either criticized or brought to awareness, this would not seem to exclude the possibility that each one of them may be treated in both of these ways. Gadamer’s claims offer, this wide range of possible interpretations quite frequently.
|
|
| 4. |
- Odenstedt, Anders
(författare)
-
Context-Dependence : Its Nature and Depth
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Gadamer on Tradition. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783319595566 - 9783319595580 ; , s. 129-152
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Gadamer tends to argue that a historical context is cognitively homogeneous in an unreflected way, and that the context-dependence of presuppositions has been underestimated. By contrast, philosophers in the Enlightenment tradition argued (a) that the influence of the historical context on the individual is relatively weak and may in principle always be overcome, and (b) that historical contexts are basically similar because universal forms of thought and conduct occur in them. Gadamer denies (a) and (b), arguing that the unreflectiveness of context-dependence results from general kinds of presuppositions, which are implicit in more specific claims without being spelled out as such, and that the persistence of such presuppositions in a historical context is easily overlooked precisely because of their general character.
|
|
| 5. |
- Odenstedt, Anders
(författare)
-
Forms of Reflection
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Gadamer on Tradition. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783319595566 - 9783319595580 ; , s. 101-128
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter considers the rather frequent objection to Gadamer, made by Jürgen Habermas, among others, that a theory of the unreflective nature of context-dependence of the kind proposed by Gadamer reduces the very lack of reflection that it asserts. Gadamer argues that context-dependence and the presuppositions that it involves are to some extent, or perhaps even largely, unreflected. But this very argument seems to rely on a reflective stance. However, a distinction should be made between a general idea of context-dependence and reflective awareness of the specific forms of this dependence. This very idea does not require that all presuppositions are reflected. Gadamer is therefore less vulnerable to the criticism that his theory of unreflectiveness contains incompatible elements than Habermas supposes. But Gadamer sometimes argues that most contextual influences are unreflected. This argument does not rely on a general idea of context-dependence only, but requires a form of reflection that is both specific and comprehensive to succeed. When Gadamer argues in this way, Habermas’ objection to him seems valid after all.
|
|
| 6. |
- Odenstedt, Anders
(författare)
-
Gadamer and Hegel on Bildung
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Gadamer on Tradition. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783319595566 - 9783319595580 ; , s. 153-189
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter examines Gadamer’s and Hegel’s theory of Bildung (education or cultivation). According to Hegel, Bildung occurs in two main forms. Initially, the child is subject to (i) elementary education, which aims to integrate it into the cultural milieu. However, later in life this Bildung may become subject to (ii) questioning and critique as a result of higher education, and this, Hegel holds, is one goal of historical study. Through this study, and the awareness of the historical variability of belief and conduct that it creates, the individual may come to relate to her own historical context in a more reflective way than previously. Gadamer invokes Hegel’s account of Bildung in sense (ii) in his theory of the purpose of the historical sciences when arguing that the claims of the past may and should challenge the presuppositions of the present. But Gadamer also argues that the scope of Bildung in sense (ii) is restricted by the individual’s unreflective reliance on presuppositions of her own historical context, and thus (ultimately) by Bildung in sense (i).
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Odenstedt, Anders
(författare)
-
History as Conversation Versus History as Science : Gadamer and Dilthey
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Gadamer on Tradition. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783319595566 - 9783319595580 ; , s. 63-100
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This chapter examines Gadamer’s view that Dilthey’s approach to historical study and, more generally, the approach of historicism, does not permit a “genuine conversation” (echten Gespräch) with the claims of the past. A genuine conversation is, Gadamer holds, such that its “subject matter” (Sache) is stressed. Although trust normally prevails in conversation, one may of course come to doubt the claims of the conversation partner and ultimately deny them. What historicism does, Gadamer argues, is something different. Historicism neither affirms nor denies the claims of the past in treating them as mere historical sources. However, Dilthey sometimes argues that metaphysical claims are “expressions of life” (Lebensäußerungen) that are independent of the historical contexts in which they occur, and that they are not historical sources alone. But Gadamer holds that treating claims as expressions, as Dilthey does, means treating them in a way that differs from the circumstances of a “genuine conversation.” According to Gadamer, Dilthey fails to respect the “moral bond” (sittliche Verbindlichkeit) of hermeneutical encounters. Respecting this bond means treating claims as true or false and not as mere expressions.
|
|
| 9. |
- Odenstedt, Anders
(författare)
-
Introduction
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Gadamer on Tradition. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783319595566 - 9783319595580 ; , s. 1-31
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Gadamer often asserts that his account of the “the human sciences” (die Geisteswissenschaften) in general and the historical sciences in particular is descriptive and not prescriptive. One cannot, Gadamer thus holds, prescribe a method to these sciences which would permit their historically situated and context-dependent character to be overcome. But Gadamer also argues that the claims of the past are regrettably dismissed in historical study if they are seen as merely historical phenomena and as expressions of their respective contexts, instead of being seen as claims made to us. And this argument has prescriptive overtones.
|
|
| 10. |
- Alerby, Eva, 1958-, et al.
(författare)
-
Philosophical reimaginings of educational places and policy : Through the metaphor of a wardrobe
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Policy Futures in Education. - : Sage Publications. - 1478-2103 .- 1478-2103. ; 17:4, s. 460-473
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The aim of this paper is to challenge the physical and conceptual boundaries of educational places and spaces with the use of metaphor: the story of Professor Kirke’s magic wardrobe in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, the first book in The Chronicles of Narnia by CF Lewis (1950). By explicating and theorising the concerns that arise, we provoke diverse ways of thinking about the complexities of shifting, expanding, constantly evolving educational spaces and places. In our theorisations, we draw on the philosophy of the life-world through Maurice Merleau-Ponty, on a post-structural approach through Julia Kristeva’s work, and on the new-materialist perspective of Gilles Deleuze. As these three philosophical perspectives draw upon different basic assumptions about humans and the world, they also illuminate different aspects of a variety of phenomena and concepts, which we elaborate on in this paper to reach a more comprehensive understanding of educational spaces and places. Our argument arises from philosophical engagements with the story of the Pevensie siblings’ transformation – and transportation – to Narnia through the wardrobe, with notions of educational openings and opportunities, to explore possibilities for reimagining the conceptions and realities of places and spaces in education. To conclude, citizens of today, including children, students, teachers, politicians and researchers, need to discuss basic assumptions for education and policy to reimagine the entangled complexities of educational spaces and places.
|
|
