A Fusion of Horizons?

Andreas Kirchner proposes some guidlines concerning the hermeneutic problems raised by Alain Badiou’s philosophical procedures. He has a suggestive way to describe what a (supposed) inconsistency found in a given text does: it triggers a plan B on part of the reader who supposedly wanted to “consume” the text “as is”. Now, there can be a great number of reactions to being faced with (partial) incomprehensibility. One can be confused, angry or overwhelmed. Hermeneutics is a plan B inasmuch it is a rule-governed enterprise, following an established methodology. One of its main rules is the “principle of charity” we have been discussing as applied to Badiou.

I want to make two points: (1) on the charitable view of Badiou’s use of mathematics and (2) on Gadamer’s “fusion of horizons” as an additional hermeneutical principle.

Read more

Situations and Horizons

The side-discussion about understanding and the prinicple of charity (see article and comments here) does not seem finished to me. In this context, Gadamer comes to my mind: He speaks about the prejudice of perfection (of sense) that gets irritated as soon as the attempt to consider the text as true breaks down (Wahrheit und Methode, Bd. 1., ed. by Mohr, Tübingen 1990, p.299). That such a breakdown is possible indicates that “understanding is primarily to understand the case” and not the text as sequence of strings. In understanding the case, it is possible that something resists to fully accept the text, because the text cannot (always) create the topic/case it is talking about. The resistance could stem from (fruitful) prejudices or because of explicitly formulated judgments. Anyway, if the attempt to consider the text as adequate breaks down, it can lead – as a plan-B – to the effort ‘to understand’ the opinion of the other psychologically or historically.

Read more