Text as action, action as text? Ricoeur, ?o?os and the affirmative search for meaning in the ‘universe of discourse’  

Oleh:

Scott-Baumann, Alison

Jenis: Article from Journal - ilmiah internasional
Dalam koleksi: Discourse Studies (Full Text) vol. 13 no. 5 (Oct. 2011), page 593-600.
Topik: hermeneutics; logos; phenomenology; Ricoeur; structuralism
Fulltext: p. 593-600.pdf (336.41KB)

Isi artikel

Ricoeur placed a great deal of importance upon text and the interpretation of text. Bell accepts this by virtue of his extended analysis of the story of Babel, and I hope to offer ways of extending and developing Bell’s arguments to incorporate the ethical demands that Ricoeur placed upon text, upon our interpretation of text and upon action as a form of readable text. This will not include a commentary on discourse analysis, which I am not qualified to give. Ricoeur differed from the structuralist tradition in that he saw the relationship between language and life as taking a dialectical form: debate that presumes the possibility of altering one’s position by grappling with different views, and often taking inspiration from Hegelian dialectics, with their contrasting polarized views and the eventual attempt at affirmative common ground. The term ?o?os (logos) was first used in a philosophical way by Heraclitus to give us the principle of order and knowledge, and yet for Heraclitus the world was dominated by conflict and change. Ricoeur studied this tension within logos between order and disorder, partly by his writing about language and his work on signs and symbols, partly through metaphor and narrative and also through his insights on translation. For him, all these are facets of the need for both Explaining and Understanding as forms of interpretation of language, ethics and action. Ricoeur’s work on logos provides us with an approach that asks whether ethics controls language or vice versa or both and how this fits in with structuralism and later movements. For Ricoeur, signs (words, texts) are not the centres of our perceptual experience. At the heart of our perception are our motivations and our actions, for which we must take responsibility in a sort of provisional affirmation that we will keep trying. In so doing we must doubt (be suspicious of) our own motives just as much as those of others, and see action as a form of readable text.

Opini Anda

Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini!

Kembali