Re: [xmca] Understanding is no method but rather a form of communication

[Larry Purss <lpscholar2@gmail.com>]

Jack
Thanks for responding to my ongoing inquiries.

Your comment,

 "Thus the meaning of a sentence is relative to the question to which it is
a reply (my emphasis) , i.e. it necessarily goes beyond what is said in it.
The logic of the human sciences is, then, as appears from what we have said
a logic of the question." generates further reflections.

Your emphasis, that the meaning is NOT in the sentence and NOT in the
subject, but rather the meaning is in the question and REPLY to the
question seems to overlap with what I'm attempting to portray.  In
Gadamer's term it is the INTERplay of language as an intersubjective
phenomena where the meaning is located. But it is not MERELY interactive
as interplay is also an historical phenomena implicated within  effective
history.  This focus on play is Gadamer's drawing our attention to the
life-world or tradition as the field on which we play.  Gadamer assumes our
subjective ways of knowing cannot transcend this moment of facticity

The insight Gadamer is trying to convey, I see expressed whenever I read
articles such as Jack Mendelson's "Gadamer-Habermas Debate".  The meaning
is not "in" Gadamer nor "in" Habermas" but is located "within" their
DEVELOPING conversation. I don't see one of them as the winner and
the other as the loser.
I believe BOTH Gadamer's and Habermas perspective's expanded as they
entered the circle of debate.

This is a question of "attitude" or "tone" or dis-position that privleges
the 2nd person voice over the 1st or 3rd person voice.
I'm not sure if this is merely my own personal bias [the personal
equation]  or if  my attitude [searching for a logic of questions as you
express this bias or prejudice] is a more general movement in "our
life-world"

This notion of truth for Gadamer is not a substantial essential ahistorical
truth but is rather a truth located within effective history. I may find
answers to this question by engaging in further conversations.

Could you give more details on your reference to Collingwood, as I may want
to follow up this lead.

Jack, I also know you have a unique perspective on action research which
you have spent years developing and implementing. Thanks for joining the
conversation.

Larry








On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 11:59 AM, Jack Whitehead <jack@actionresearch.net>wrote:

> Dear Larry - I do agree with you about Gadamer having a contribution to
> make to action research. I've integrated the following insights from
> Gadamer into my own action research:
>
> "To conduct a conversation requires first of all that the partners to it
> do not talk at cross purposes. Hence its necessary structure is that of
> question and answer. The first condition of the art of conversation is to
> ensure that the other person is with us…. To conduct a conversation….
> requires that one does not try to out-argue the other person, but that one
> really considers the weight of the other's opinion. Hence it is an art of
> testing. But the art of testing is the art of questioning. For we have seen
> that to question means to lay open, to place in the open. As against the
> solidity of opinions, questioning makes the object and all its
> possibilities fluid. A person who possesses the 'art' of questioning is a
> person who is able to prevent the suppression of questions by the dominant
> opinion.... Thus the meaning of a sentence is relative to the question to
> which it is a reply (my emphasis) , i.e.  it necessarily goes beyond what
> is said in it. The logic of the human sciences is, then, as appears from
> what we have said a logic of the question.  Despite Plato we are not very
> ready for such a logic." (pp. 330-333)
>
> Gadamer, H.G. (1975)   Truth and Method, p. 333. London; Sheed and Ward.
>
> Gadamer recommended Collingwood's ideas on the importance of forming a
> question in Chapter 5 of his autobiography on Question and Answer.
>
>
> Love Jack.
>
> On 17 Jul 2012, at 18:58, Larry Purss wrote:
>
> > I have been reflecting on action research and the turn it took into
> > discussing voice, tone of voice, and the loss or extinguishing of voice
> > when others are marginalized.
> >
> > I came across this statement from Gadamer who wrote the foreword to the
> > book "Introduction to Philosophical Hermeneutics" by Jean Grondin.
> >
> > "So, understanding is no method but rather a form of community among
> those
> > who understand each other. Thus a DIMENSION is OPENED up that is not just
> > one among many FIELDS of inquiry but rather constitutes the PRAXIS OF
> LIFE.
> >
> > Gadamer is exploring the 2nd person voice and putting it play with the
> 1st
> > person and 3rd person voice.
> >
> > I wanted to abstract this dis-position towards the 2nd voice. I want to
> now
> > embed this statement in its context. Gadamer wrote,
> >
> > "But it was only when Dilthey and his school gained influence on the
> > phenomenological movement that understanding was no longer MERELY
> > juxtaposed with conceptualization and explanation."[Gadamer, foreword]
> >
> > In other words, understanding came to be seen as constituting the very
> > fundamental structure of human becoming-in-the-world and moved to the
> very
> > center of philosophy.
> >
> > "Thereby subjectivity and self-consciousness lost their primacy. Now
> there
> > is an Other who is not an object for the subject - but someone to whom we
> > are BOUND in the reciprocations of language and life. So, understanding
> is
> > no method but rather a form of COMMUNITY among those who understand each
> > other. Thus a dimension is opened up that is not just one among many
> fields
> > but rather constitutes the praxis of life." [Gadamer, foreword]
> >
> > Gadamer's tone of voice may have something to contribute to action
> research.
> >
> > Larry
> > __________________________________________
> > _____
> > xmca mailing list
> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
> >
>
>
> Love Jack.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> When Martin Dobson, a colleague, died in 2002 the last thing he said to me
> was 'Give my Love to the Department'. In the 20 years I'd worked with
> Martin it was his loving warmth of humanity that I recall with great life
> affirming pleasure and I'm hoping that in Love Jack we can share this
> value of common humanity.
>
> Jack Whitehead , Professor, Liverpool Hope University, UK.
>
> Visiting Fellow, University of Bath, UK.
>
> Life-time member of OMNIBUS (All Bath University Staff).
>
> web-site http://www.actionresearch.net with email address.
>
>
>
> __________________________________________
> _____
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
__________________________________________
_____
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca