The Hermeneutics of Polarized Ideologies. Conflict, (Ir)rationality and Dialogue

Autores

  • Gonçalo Marcelo CECH, Universidade de Coimbra

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/errs.2022.595

Palavras-chave:

Conflict of Interpretations, Hermeneutical Delusion, Ideology, Social Hermeneutics

Resumo

This article devises a social hermeneutical framework to make sense of the problem of the conflict of polarized ideologies. First, it discusses the problem of irrationality in belief and behavior, arguing for a contextual and non-reductionist account of rationality. Second, it shows how a social hermeneutical approach can provide a useful toolbox for social epistemology. Third, drawing from Paul Ricœur’s notions of the conflict of interpretations and of constitutive and pathological ideologies, it redescribes pathological ideologies as totalizing systems of beliefs in which subjects fall under the spell of a mechanism of hermeneutical delusion, leaving them in a state of ideological bias. Finally, it discusses the possibility of tackling the problem of hermeneutical delusion and polarized ideologies through fostering hermeneutical dialogue geared towards mutual understanding.

Referências

Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1958).

Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, trans. W. D. Ross, in The Complete Works of Aristotle, ed. Jonathan Barnes (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984).

Peter Boghossian and James Lindsay, How to Have Impossible Conversations. A Very Practical Guide (New York: Lifelong Books, 2019).

Luc Boltanski and Ève Chiapello, The New Spirit of Capitalism (London: Verso, 2017).

Quassim Cassam, Conspiracy Theories (Cambridge: Polity, 2019).

John Cook, “The 5 Characteristics of Science Denialism,” 17 March 2010, online: https://skepticalscience.com/5-characteristics-of-scientific-denialism.html.

António Damásio, Descartes’ Error. Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain [1994] (London: Penguin, 2005).

Scott Davidson and Johann Michel (eds), “L’herméneutique du soi/Hermeneutics of the Self,” Études ricœuriennes/Ricœur Studies, vol. 1/1 (2010), online: https://ricoeur.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/ricoeur/issue/view/2.

Pascal Diethelm and Martin McKee, “Denialism. What Is It and How Should Scientists Respond?,” European Journal of Public Health, vol. 19/1 (2009), 2-4, online: https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckn139.

Miranda Fricker, Epistemic Injustice. Power & the Ethics of Knowing (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2007).

Alvin Goldman and Cailin O’Connor, “Social Epistemology,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 28 August 2019, online: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology-social/.

Jürgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society [1962] (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1991).

Carolyn M. Hendricks, Selen A. Ercan and John Boswell, Mending Democracy. Democratic Repair in Disconnected Times (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020).

Axel Honneth, “A Social Pathology of Reason. On the Intellectual Legacy of Critical Theory,” in Pathologies of Reason: On the Legacy of Critical Theory, trans. James Ingram (New York: Columbia University Press, 2009), 19-42.

Martin Hoofnagle and Chris Jay Hoofnagle, “What is Denialism?,” 30 April 2007, online: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4002823.

Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2013).

Richard Kearney & Melissa Fitzpatrick, Radical Hospitality: From Thought to Action (New York: Fordham University Press, 2021).

Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. Towards a Radical Democratic Politics [1985] (London: Verso, 2001).

Finlay Malcolm, “The Rationality of Fundamentalist Belief,” Journal of Social Philosophy (2021), 1-20, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/josp.12440.

Gonçalo Marcelo, “Making Sense of the Social. Hermeneutics and Social Philosophy,” Études ricœuriennes/Ricœur Studies, vol. 3/1 (2012), 67-85, online: DOI: 10.5195/errs.2012.131.

—, “Critique des idéologies, critique des utopies,” Études ricœuriennes/Ricœur Studies, vol. 9/1 (2018), 28-41, online: DOI: 10.5195/errs.2018.430.

Lee McIntyre, How to Talk to a Science Denier. Conversations with Flat Earthers, Climate Deniers, and Others Who Defy Reason (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2021).

Johann Michel, Homo Interpretans. Towards a Transformation of Hermeneutics. (London/New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2019).

Chantal Mouffe, Agonistics. Thinking the World Politically (London: Verso, 2013).

Rik Peels, “Extreme Beliefs. The Epistemology and Ethics of Fundamentalism,” ERC funded Project, online: https://extremebeliefs.com.

Steven Pinker, Enlightenment Now. The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism and Progress (New York: Viking, 2018).

Hilary Putnam, The Collapse of the Fact-Value Dichotomy and Other Essays (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004).

Paul Ricœur, Le conflit des interprétations (Paris: Seuil, 1969).

—, Freud and Philosophy. An Essay on Interpretation, trans. Denis Savage (New Haven/London: Yale University Press, 1970).

—, Interpretation Theory. Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning (Fort Worth: Texas Christian University Press, 1976).

—, Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences, ed. and trans. John B. Thompson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981).

—, Lectures on Ideology and Utopia, ed. George H. Taylor (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986).

Alison Scott-Baumann, Ricœur and the Hermeneutics of Suspicion (London: Continuum, 2009).

Mona Simion, “Resistance to Evidence and the Duty to Believe,” Forthcoming in Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.

Nicholas Smith, Strong Hermeneutics. Contingency and Moral Identity (London/New York: Routledge, 1997).

Charles Taylor, Multiculturalism. Examining the Politics of Recognition (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994).

—, “Self-Interpreting Animals,” in Philosophical Papers, Vol. 1, Human Agency and Language (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 45-76.

George H. Taylor, “Why Ideology and Utopia Today?,” in Stephanie N. Arel and Dan R. Stiver (eds), Ideology and Utopia in the Twenty-First Century. The Surplus of Meaning in Ricoeur’s Dialectical Concept (Lanham: Lexington Books, 2018), 217-35.

Jan-Willem van Prooijen, Talia Cohen Rodrigues, Carlotta Bunzel, Oana Georgescu, Dániel Komáromi and André P. M. Krouwel, “Populist Gullibility. Conspiracy Theories, News Credibility, Bullshit Receptivity, and Paranormal Belief,” Political Psychology (2022), 1-19, online: https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12802.

Michael Walzer, Interpretation and Social Criticism (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987).

Downloads

Publicado

2022-07-07

Edição

Vol. 13 N.º 1 (2022)

Secção

Articles

Licença


Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.

    2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.

    3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons 4.0 License (Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works), or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
      1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
      2. Noncommercial—other users (including Publisher) may not use this Work for commercial purposes;
      3. No Derivative Works—other users (including Publisher) may not alter, transform, or build upon this Work,with the understanding that any of the above conditions can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.

    4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

    5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a pre-publication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.

    6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.

    7. The Author represents and warrants that:

      1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
      2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
      3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
      4. the Work has not previously been published;
      5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
      6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
         
    8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.