Finally, the last trait of hermeneutics: interpretation of faces the need to endlessly interpret itself, to return to their itself. Hence two important implications. First, from now on, the interpretation of will always raise the question "who?". Interpreted it, that is oznacenom, but, in essence, the following: who exactly realized interpretation. Basic interpretation - the interpreter, and to be, this is the sense Nietzsche gave to the word "psychology". Second consequence: the interpretation always has to interpret itself, she can't avoid returning to itself. Time interpretation - cyclical, in contrast to the time of the sign having a fixed term and time of dialectics, which, in spite of that, linear. This time should pass again where it has already passed. Therefore, the only real danger - but the danger of death threatens the interpretation oddly enough, the side characters. To believe in the existence of signs as something primary, original and cohesive systematic guidance is to interpret it would be death. Life for her would be, on the contrary, assume that there is nothing in addition to interpretations. I think it is good to understand that today often forget: hermeneutics and semiology are mortal enemies. Hermeneutics, which reduces itself to the scope of semiology believes in the absolute the existence of signs; it refuses such properties interpretation as coercion, incompleteness and infinity, it sets the value of terror, and language is under suspicion. Here we learn Marxism, as it was after Marx. On the contrary, hermeneutics, which is reduced to itself, enters the field of languages endlessly involving themselves in this area, belonging and madness and pure language . And here we find Nietzsche.
Finally, the last trait of hermeneutics: interpretation of faces
ReplyDeletethe need to endlessly interpret itself, to return to their
itself. Hence two important implications. First, from now on, the interpretation of
will always raise the question "who?". Interpreted it, that is
oznacenom, but, in essence, the following: who exactly realized
interpretation. Basic interpretation - the interpreter, and
to be, this is the sense Nietzsche gave to the word "psychology". Second
consequence: the interpretation always has to interpret itself,
she can't avoid returning to itself. Time interpretation -
cyclical, in contrast to the time of the sign having a fixed term and
time of dialectics, which, in spite of that, linear. This time
should pass again where it has already passed. Therefore, the only
real danger - but the danger of death threatens the interpretation
oddly enough, the side characters. To believe in the existence of signs
as something primary, original and cohesive
systematic guidance is to interpret it would be death.
Life for her would be, on the contrary, assume that there is nothing
in addition to interpretations. I think it is good to understand that today
often forget: hermeneutics and semiology are mortal enemies.
Hermeneutics, which reduces itself to the scope of semiology believes in the absolute
the existence of signs; it refuses such properties interpretation
as coercion, incompleteness and infinity, it
sets the value of terror, and language is under suspicion.
Here we learn Marxism, as it was after Marx. On the contrary,
hermeneutics, which is reduced to itself, enters the field of languages
endlessly involving themselves in this area, belonging and
madness and pure language . And here we find Nietzsche.