“Serious errors of understanding occur when one side or the other is given such arbitrary preferential treatment. I need only mention the names of Dilthey, Gadamer and Ricoeur to refer to some of these errors, which cannot be attributed to Schleiermacher. Recent scholarship, led by Manfred Frank, has seen through the one-sided interpretations of each of these otherwise great thinkers who have influenced generations of Schleiermacher interpreters.” (David E. Klemm, "Schleiermacher's Hermeneutic: The Sacred and the Profane," The Sacred and the Profane: Contemporary Demands on Hermeneutics, ed. Jeffrey F. Keuss [Aldershot: Ashgate, 2003] 68.)
Showing posts with label Schleiermacher. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Schleiermacher. Show all posts
Thursday, 4 November 2010
A different interpretation of Schleiermacher's hermeneutics
Jean Grondin challenges Gadamer's interpretation of Schleiermacher's hermeneutics. Today I discovered that Klemm agrees with Grondin, and in fact points out that Dilthey, Gadamer and Ricoeur have all contributed to the misunderstanding of Schleiermacher:
Monday, 22 September 2008
A new evaluation of Schleiermacher
These days we are reading Schleiermacher in the Hermeneutics course.
Since Grondin, of course, we have been aware that Gadamer seems to have misread Schleiermacher, and that there is a new, far more charitable interpretation of the man.
Andrew Bowie confirms this new interpretation and also indicates that it has by now become consensual. He cites Manfred Frank, Richard Palmer, Stephen Prickett, Christian Berner and of course Grondin himself as part of this consensus. Cf. Bowie, “Further Reading,” Schleiermacher, Hermeneutics and Criticism and Other Writings xxiv-xxv.
Since Grondin, of course, we have been aware that Gadamer seems to have misread Schleiermacher, and that there is a new, far more charitable interpretation of the man.
Andrew Bowie confirms this new interpretation and also indicates that it has by now become consensual. He cites Manfred Frank, Richard Palmer, Stephen Prickett, Christian Berner and of course Grondin himself as part of this consensus. Cf. Bowie, “Further Reading,” Schleiermacher, Hermeneutics and Criticism and Other Writings xxiv-xxv.
Schleiermacher and Heidegger
Kisiel has shown that Heidegger arrived at his idea of ‘being in the world’, which is prior to any epistemological attempt to ground knowledge in an account of the relationship between subject and object, and at his desire to deconstruct previous metaphysics, in part via his reading of Schleiermacher's On Religion.
- Kisiel, The Genesis of Heidegger’s Being and Time (Berkeley / Los Angeles / London, 1995), as indicated in A. Bowie, “Introduction,” Schleiermacher, Hermeneutics and Criticism and other writings, ed. Andrew Bowie (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998) xvi.
- Kisiel, The Genesis of Heidegger’s Being and Time (Berkeley / Los Angeles / London, 1995), as indicated in A. Bowie, “Introduction,” Schleiermacher, Hermeneutics and Criticism and other writings, ed. Andrew Bowie (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998) xvi.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)