Hermenéutica y relativismo. Consideraciones en torno al enfoque conceptualista
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24197/trim.22-23.2022.5-27Keywords:
Dreyfus-McDowell debate, Conceptual experience, Martin Heidegger, Phenomenology, RelativismAbstract
Abstract: As rational and discursive creatures, our relationship with the world is necessarily articulated through a certain understanding of both ourselves and what surrounds us. This means, in other words, that our experience is not the result of mere perception, but of a construction that guides and limits, through deliberate processes or not, both our actions and our beliefs and convictions. Faced with these considerations, we can ask ourselves some highly relevant philosophical questions: how is this constitutive understanding of what is human articulated? Is it a necessarily conceptual process? Or is there a mode of relationship with reality prior to the plane of concepts? Are we capable of carrying out thoughtless actions in which our rationality is not at stake? Such questions cross an intense philosophical debate that extends to the present, initiated by the philosophers Hubert Dreyfus and John McDowell. The discussion focuses on the ultimate nature of our exchange with the world and with others, and on the possibilities (or not) of establishing a contact that is articulated outside the rational and conceptual dimension of our structures.
In the present work, our interest will be to analyze and describe the central positions maintained by both authors with three fundamental objectives. On the one hand, to specify the theoretical disagreement between both positions, understanding the different theoretical commitments that they entail. On the other hand, to maintain that Dreyfus's anti-intellectualist argument is at odds with a series of familiar phenomena, indicating a set of considerations for which McDowell defends a better position. Finally, to point out the difficulties inherent in the interpretation that Dreyfus makes of Heidegger's phenomenology, in order to propose a hermeneutical alternative that finds the German philosopher in a space much closer to McDowell's conceptualist conception. Our general hypothesis will be that Dreyfus' proposal according to which our primary way of relating to the world is prior to the conceptual plane is unfeasible due to the individualistic assumptions on which it rests. In this direction, we will defend the idea that a conceptualist approach does justice to the idea that acting and knowing is only possible in a community of rational agents, neither human action nor knowledge being possible beyond the limits of the relationship with other discursive and rational beings.
Downloads
References
BIBLIOGRAFÍA
Anscombe, Gertrude (1957), Intention, Oxford, Blackwell.
Bertorello, Adrián (2008), El límite del lenguaje. La filosofía de Heidegger como teoría de la enunciación, Buenos Aires, Biblos.
Brandom, Robert (1994), Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment, Cambridge MA, Harvard University Press.
Brandom, Robert (2000), Articulating Reasons: An Introduction to Inferentialism, Cambridge MA, Harvard University Press.
Collingwood, Robin (1946), The Idea of History, Oxford, Clarendon Press.
Dilthey, Wilhelm (1961), Patterns and Meaning in History: Thoughts on History and Society, London, Harper Row.
Dray, William (1957), Laws and Explanation in History, Greenwood Press.
Droysen, Johann (1893), “Outline of the principles of history”, en Andrews, E. B., Krüger, H., & Buckle, H. T. (eds.), (1893), Grundriss der Historik, Boston, Ginn.
Engel, Pascal (2002), “Intentionality, Normativity and Community”, Facta Philosophica, vol. 4, pp. 25-49.
Heidegger, Martin (1986), Sein und Zeit (SZ), Tübingen, Max Niemeyer.
Heidegger, Martin (1976), Wegmarken (GA 9, 1919–1961), Frankfurt am Main, Vittorio Klostermann (traducción especial de Leyte y Cortés, Madrid, Alianza, 2007).
Heidegger, Martin (1995), Ontologie. Hermeneutik der Faktizität, Frankfurt am Main, Vittorio Klostermann (traducción especial Aspiunza, J. (2000), Ontología. Hermenéutica de la Facticidad, Madrid, Alianza).
Hempel, Carl (1942), “The Function of General Laws in History”, Journal of Philosophy, vol. 39(2), pp. 35–48.
Kalpokas, Daniel (2009), “Objetividad como ausencia de toda perspectiva”, Revista de filosofía, pp. 1-19.
Mill, Stuart (1843), “A System of Logic”, en Robson, J. (ed.), The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, (1974), vol. VIII, London, Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Rodríguez, Ramón (2015), Fenómeno e interpretación. Ensayos de fenomenología hermenéutica, Madrid, Tecnos.
Sellars, Wilfrid (1953), “Inference and Meaning”, Mind, vol. 62, pp. 313-38.
Sellars, Wilfrid (1963a), “Some Reflections on Language Games”, en Science, Perception and Reality, Atascadero, Ridgeview Publishing Co., pp. 321–58.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Andrés Ignacio Bellido Arias, Ayelén Sánchez

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The articles published at TRIM. Tordesillas: Revista de investigación multidisciplinar will have a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
The journal allows the authors to retain publishing rights. Authors may reprint their articles in other media without having to request authorization, provided they indicate that the article was originally published in TRIM. Tordesillas: Revista de investigación multidisciplinar.
