Gadamer's Philosophy

Because we are so keen on learning, we are disengaged from our experiences, and therefore are not in the right place to understand ourselves (3). The words that are used to define any given concept are not to be taken at face value since the judgment of our moral values depends on their respective time periods and cultural influences, which are subject to change as everything else does. In other words, they are products of the moral projections of people’s values, which often have a multitude of dimensions that surpass the shallow fields of initial interpretation. Consequently, we need to look beyond the surface interpretation of these words by re-interpreting their meanings many times to be able to judge what we believe. As we change with time, our interpretations are subject to change, and our value systems evolve, both preventing us from establishing absolute meaning regarding anything. As a result, we cannot truly understand concepts unless we remove several historical layers from them. Many times throughout his polemic, Nietzsche hints at the necessity of asking a question from “various perspectives” (41). “Understanding the demonstrated purpose or utility of a thing, its form, its organization” is not

Weber states that “a motive is a complex of subjective meaning which seems to the actor himself or to the observer an adequate ground for the conduct in question. We apply the term ‘adequacy on the level of meaning’ to the subjective interpretation of a coherent course of conduct when” the action is “recognized to constitute a ‘typical’ complex of meaning” (98-99). What Weber means by this is that when there is a complicated reasoning behind an action, a subjective interpretation must be applied in that situation. It is misguided to oversimplify a complex situation because the entire perspective of the situation can be lost. Once the subjective interpretation can be matched up with our cultural norms and rules, then we have reached adequacy on the level of meaning in understanding that situation. Adequacy on the level of meaning can help us answer questions that are difficult to answers, one of these being why do people commit certain

On the other hand, Nietzsche believes that there are no rules to the life of human beings and only the coward cling to religion in the hope of finding something which is not there. He believes that truth is all that is needed and nothing is more powerful than self belief in truth.

To begin with, Nietzsche’s contribution to the study of ‘morality’ has three core aspects: a criticism of moral genealogists, modern evolutionary theory, and a critique of moral values (Ansell-Pearson, xv). For Nietzsche, reading morality is complex due to the numbers of errors people have incorporated into their fundamental ways of thinking, feeling and living (Ansell-Pearson, xvi). Furthermore, these errors are the example of an individual’s complete ignorance of oneself and the world. For years, people have been

From the Twilight of the Idols, Friedrich Nietzsche, German philosopher gives us The Four Great Errors. In this piece of work Nietzsche presents a vivid overview of mature philosophy. Twilight of the Idols aims in attracting what is seen by Nietzsche sees as one of the main enemies of life-affirmation in the West. Nietzsche was a philosopher during the late 19th Century who challenges the foundations of Christians and morality. It was believe that Nietzsche killed god and that there is a dead quote behind his meaning of god. He uses the term “God is dead” which could be explained that the god of the Christians is not an actual person or being and is not believable.

Nietzsche claims that the Christian religion has, for a very long time, been used as a means to confuse and dismiss reality. Instead, priests have been suggesting vague concepts such as “judgement”, “salvation”, “faith”, “sin”, etc. in order to freely command whatever values they see fit. The priests, in Nietzsche’s view, have been using the transcendental and unfalsifiable realm of the religious in order to create selfishly motivated lies for the gain of power. The poor masses have been following this bunch of lies because that they are deceived in thinking that they will themselves gain more power by the way of God offering equality and eternal life. However, in all actuality, the world is not equal and these masses are being made to suffer an even greater deal than necessary for the sake of a filthy religious lie. Nietzsche suggests that we, instead, abandon these lies and leave the “will of God” in the past for a more happy future. Instead, Nietzsche offers, we can come to terms with reality and authentically seek to fulfill our deepest desires; i.e. the natural values attributed to our psyche by the way of the process of

Essentially this means that, say a poem for example, only has meaning because it is recognized as such and therefore every word of the poem is given significance while it’s being read. Fish portrays this concept by giving an anecdote of an assignment he’d given to many of his college classes, the class in particular that he discusses in his essay is a class studying English religious poetry of the seventeenth century. This class is an interpretive community for several reasons, they all attend the same college, they all are in the same classroom, and they all have studied the subject of religious poetry. In the assignment presented to this class he wrote on the blackboard “Jacobs-Rosenbaum, Levin, thorne, Hayes and Ohman (?)”, all are names of important literary figures throughout history but when presented to the class they were told it was a religious poem they had to interpret. The class came up with several conclusions as to how the names related to religious history after vigorous efforts to find religious meaning in the names. Fish claims that their ability to take those names and find religious meaning in them is due to the fact that “they knew in advance that they were dealing with a poem—and then the distinguishing features then followed...acts of recognition, rather than being triggered by formal characteristics, are their source” (Fish 326). As said earlier, interpretation is

Religion, truth, morality, and its value to human society has been a topic of great interest to numerous philosophers. Ironically, Friedrich Nietzsche strongly suggests that there is no such thing as morality, no absolute truth, and that religion is much more theoretical than it is actually based on the natural world. He views morality as not existing in nature with neither good nor bad, only useful and harmful. Then, although there is no absolute truth, he believes a main component of truth is the way different perspectives create their own type of truths. This can be observed with master morality and slave morality. Each have their own views on “good” based on each of their positions in society. This then affects their views on morality,

In “The Portable Nietzsche,” Nietzsche investigates the meaning of truth in the apparent world and its relationship to the proposed existence of God. More specifically, the philosopher attempts to explain how our world is misguided by the moral framework propagated by Christianity. This religion promises a God created “true world,” but only for those who are the

Hans-Georg Gadamer, the previously mentioned German philosopher, writes on play in Truth and Method, but it is more from an ontological perspective than just pure play. In regards to the characteristics of play, Gadamer mentions such things as play being a non-serious, yet serious endeavor; a to-and-fro movement that is repetitive; that the player is being played by the game; rules and structures of play; and play is chosen. In remnants like these, one sees traces of Huizinga’s characteristics. However, Gadamer is not as much involved with giving characteristics of or a definition of play as he is in understanding its being.

Fredrich Nietzsche is considered by the masses to be revolutionary in both his career as an author and a philosopher as he had a tremendous impact on the twentieth century up and even today. However, Nietzsche’s views were highly unlike other popular beliefs and conventional beliefs of his time. Almost all of his published works were, and still are, considered controversial. His philosophies are more than just controversial and unconventional viewpoints, however; they are extreme and dangerous if taken out of context or misinterpreted.

The whole point of reading is to comprehend and put into perspective whatever you read. There are some books, poetry and other types of reading material that are straight-forward with the message that it’s intended to convey. Then there are others that can leave you pretty perplexed as to the meaning behind the passage. Take, for example the Bible: several

There are numerous ways to interpret any work of art. A same piece of work can be interpreted in different ways by different people. Many strategies and aspects can be considered when it comes to interpreting a literary work and understanding the work better. By considering the context, genre, the code of the text, and the response of the readers, the text is better comprehended.

Nietzsche introduced an idea of philosophy that was more than simply a rational groundwork of existence or as the pursuit of an absolute truth. Instead, he suggested that philosophy is something to be respected as a personal interpretation of life and all its faculties (morality, existentialism etc.) and that was – for him - focused on life affirmation. Furthermore, this thinking implies that philosophy is not a be all and end all answer to life’s questions; rather, it is merely a

For him, Semiotics is a formal doctrine of sign, signs must have a “real connection with the thing it signifies.” It is a much boarder clasof Saussure’s signifier, as it extends into the physical as well. According to him, there is a third element that must be present for signification to take happen. This, additional element is the understanding of the relation between signifier and signified, he referred to this as the interpretant. The interpretant sheds light on the relationship between signifier and signified. Pierce admonishes that a sign or signifier must be interpreted in order to exist. The sign or signifier creates an interpretant and this in turn allows us to access it object or the signified. In other words, if the sign means something it requires somebody (a mind) signifying and something (an object) that is