Gadamer’s Linguistic Turn Revisited in Dialogue with Cheng’s Onto-Generative Hermeneutics

IF 0.2 3区 哲学 0 ASIAN STUDIES
Andrew Fuyarchuk
{"title":"Gadamer’s Linguistic Turn Revisited in Dialogue with Cheng’s Onto-Generative Hermeneutics","authors":"Andrew Fuyarchuk","doi":"10.1163/15406253-12340032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nGadamer’s linguistic turn has been criticized for eclipsing ontological grounds for truth by conflating the meaning of existence with history. Chung-ying Cheng’s recognizes the nihilistic implications of a ceaseless quest for meaning that cannot but perpetually slip away and in response, discloses the cosmo-ontological grounds that Gadamer’s interpretive acts presuppose. In so doing, Cheng initiates a theoretical appropriation and integration between Western philosophy and the Yijing tradition. However, Cheng also interprets Gadamer from a Heideggerian perspective without due regard to Plato. When Gadamer’s turn to language is understood in terms of his claim that Socrates removes the contradiction between the Pythagorean One and the many by studying the forms in language, then there is room in the said turn for temporalizing the meaning of Being in the dialogue form. It is through the dialectical interplay between the auditory and visual dispositions underlying orality and literacy, the two mediums in which human understanding is entangled for Gadamer, that the “creative” emerges in his thought from within and out of a prior historically effected consciousness that in the final analysis attests to the universality of Cheng’s onto-generative hermeneutics.","PeriodicalId":45346,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CHINESE PHILOSOPHY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF CHINESE PHILOSOPHY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15406253-12340032","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Gadamer’s linguistic turn has been criticized for eclipsing ontological grounds for truth by conflating the meaning of existence with history. Chung-ying Cheng’s recognizes the nihilistic implications of a ceaseless quest for meaning that cannot but perpetually slip away and in response, discloses the cosmo-ontological grounds that Gadamer’s interpretive acts presuppose. In so doing, Cheng initiates a theoretical appropriation and integration between Western philosophy and the Yijing tradition. However, Cheng also interprets Gadamer from a Heideggerian perspective without due regard to Plato. When Gadamer’s turn to language is understood in terms of his claim that Socrates removes the contradiction between the Pythagorean One and the many by studying the forms in language, then there is room in the said turn for temporalizing the meaning of Being in the dialogue form. It is through the dialectical interplay between the auditory and visual dispositions underlying orality and literacy, the two mediums in which human understanding is entangled for Gadamer, that the “creative” emerges in his thought from within and out of a prior historically effected consciousness that in the final analysis attests to the universality of Cheng’s onto-generative hermeneutics.
伽达默尔的语言转向与程的本生解释学的对话
伽达默尔的语言学转向因将存在的意义与历史混为一谈而掩盖了真理的本体论基础而受到批评。郑中英的作品承认了对意义的无休止追求的虚无主义含义,而这种追求只能永远溜走,并作为回应,揭示了伽达默尔的解释行为所预设的宇宙本体论基础。由此,程开启了西方哲学与易学传统的理论移植与融合。然而,程对伽达默尔的解读也是从海德格尔的角度出发的,并没有充分考虑柏拉图。当伽达默尔对语言的转向被理解为苏格拉底通过研究语言中的形式来消除毕达哥拉斯的“一”与“多”之间的矛盾时,那么在所述转向中就有时间化对话形式中存在的意义的空间,人类理解与伽达默尔纠缠在一起的两种媒介,即“创造性”从先前受历史影响的意识内部和外部出现在他的思想中,最终分析证明了程对生成解释学的普遍性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Since its foundation Journal of Chinese Philosophy has established itself at the forefront of contemporary scholarly understanding of Chinese philosophy, providing an outlet for the dissemination and interpretation of Chinese thought and values. The journal has three main aims: first, to make available careful English-language translations of important materials in the history of Chinese philosophy; second, to publish interpretations and expositions in Chinese philosophy; third, a commitment to publishing comparative studies within Chinese philosophy or in relation to schools of thought in the Western tradition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信