Appendix "on hermeneutics and critical theory" of their book critical and historical , José Manuel Romero briefly discussed several Ramón Rodríguez ideas from very worthy to take account for that purpose that we proposed to make us talk tradition posthusserliana phenomenology and Heidegger, in his account of the facticity of the world of life that determines a sense in the catchment (not representative) of reality, and some neo-Marxism of Frankfurt as Horkheimer and Adorno and Lukács. This program outlines Romero in these few last pages of his book. To do this go to the previous texts Heidegger Being and Time to whose analytical Dasein anticipates some aspects. This consists of lectures given by Heidegger in Freiburg from 1919 to 1923. In them, the Germanic master addresses a hermeneutics of facticity that interprets and attempts to make intelligible the factual life or human existence as a result or original dimension from which it is the sense of things and our relationship with them. Heidegger seeks in these early writings approach the actuality no theoretical (or objectifying unrepresentative). Theoretical mode would be a positivist factuality of the facts as appear to the gaze of the Cartesian subject of modernity. This means a formalization and abstraction that comes from practice and is intended to also encompass the subjective in a way objectifying (psychology). "The theoretical attitude hold a significant relationship off the subject of knowledge has to the case that seeks to know, opening respect him a break that would ensure an alleged contemplation, not involved in the research topic "(p. 232). The relation of the subject or existing knowledge with the world is a detached and objectifying way that betrays and distorts the factual life may not appear in its proper sense. No approach mode is objectifying a hermeneutics of facticity, "which does not take a contemplative attitude about your subject, but it is known involved in it, because hermeneutics is nothing more than an extension of the trend reflective interpreted itself that constitutes the factual life "(p. 232). Faced with the contemplative and external tested the interpretation hermeneutics "internal", which itself is known ingredient of facticity or part of what is interpreted. This is due to a desire to annihilate critical modes of perception distorted by those who acquire a false facticity cosist consistency, as the reality of the world that is merely there. This was replaced in Being and Time, as a critic, by the fear of death that gives us existence as one happen unavailable, thoughtless and non-rational.
Romero said a parallel between the early Heidegger's hermeneutics (critical) of the facticity and Horkheimer of the first theory criticism, which unfortunately does not develop in his book. Only points to the suggestive idea of \u200b\u200ba convergence in its various critical theories, in the manner indicated, between the early Heidegger and Horkheimer in the thirties. "Again, [the critical theory of Horkheimer] what is the purpose of confrontation is what Horkheimer called traditional theory, characterized by the objectifying attitude, formal and contemplative denounced by the early Heidegger. His counter-theory is a form of non-objectifying (non-theoretical, as Heidegger would say), ie a critical theory that is known involved, interested party, in what that takes as problematic issue: the historical life of the existing social formation "(p. 233). In the case of critical theory than it is to dissolve the false appear noun, such as objectivity, the capitalist society formations that are imposed as a second nature with fatalism. The critical theorist known part, yes, of that training, what it criticizes. "Now, the reality that part is not, as in Heidegger, a factual life, while being of beings is the human being as such, ie as defining its ontological nature, leaves out merely ontic dimensions and thus appears as a lack of specificity (And can be described, in short, abstract). For Horkheimer, however, that reality is a developed capitalist society, which implies a fractured community, torn by conflicts between conflicting social positions "(p. 234). The critical theorist known part of this community fractured and "criticism is his claim the hand of the assumption of their daily political and moral, which concerned his case as explicitly critical theoretical approach to their problems" (p. 234).
with the nuances mentioned, the convergence of thinkers as disparate as Heidegger and Horkheimer can be explained, says Romero, perhaps by mediating position Marcuse or the first figure of the first Lukacs History and Class Consciousness we also comment on this blog. This dual possibility of a contemplative or dialectical approach to reality was addressed, as we are highlighting in posts dedicated to Lukács, the Hungarian Marxist. Romero said "It is clear that Horkheimer attempted to rethink the approach to the hindrance purifies Lukács and metaphysical idealists can thematized in it (above all, his conception of the proletariat as identical subject-object of history), while maintaining the pretense of making productive ideas about a dialectic approach (which would not reifying its object or its attitude epistemological) to the current social reality "(p. 235). The background against which it can approach the project the first hermeneutic Heidegger, relatively speaking, is in the enhancement of historicity in which ownership is played the normative basis of an investigation does not objectifying the cultural milieu of today's societies problemize false appearances and substantial capitalist society to bring to light new possibilities for real. Thus, the key would be, following the conclusion of the book by José Manuel Romero, to assume the historicity of all things human, including the regulations from the challenges that stand Critical to the given, in the midst of a facticity known from which emerge their own improvement, as dissolution of the substantive false appearance of things crystallize.
0 comments:
Post a Comment