Search

The purpose of this article is to analyze Dilthey's philosophical project. Our basic problem is why Dilthey wanted to constitute a theory of knowledge. Dilthey aimed to determine field of human sciences in terms of method by constituting a theory of knowledge. That is known as his philosophical project. He also criticized existing theories with a view to determining his own position. In this article, we will evaluate Dilthey's project in detail. German philosopher Wilhelm Dilthey has made significant contributions in human sciences in the 19th Century, for this reason, he is considered the prominent representative of the human sciences. Dilthey aimed to separate the human sciences from the natural sciences and to determine the autonomous field of the humanities and social sciences. Dilthey emphasizes this purpose in detail in his work titled The Formation of the Historical World in the Human Sciences, in which he attempts to ground the human sciences in terms of subject-matter and method. According to Dilthey, human beings have a life in which they become aware of their own existence. Hence, they participate in life with a view to understanding their existence. Dilthey thinks that inner experience can be understood historically, so he resorts to history in his theory of knowledge. He distinguishes between "Explanation" and "Understanding". According to him, while the concept of explanation belongs to natural sciences, the concept of understanding belongs to human sciences. Dilthey argues that there is the highest form of understanding. The highest form is to understand the whole itself which includes individual experiences by starting from individual experiences. According to him, best example of this form is hermeneutics. Hermeneutics enables human beings to understand themselves in structure to which they belong. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On the basis of a definition of ecology centred on Merleau-Ponty's thought, this essay examines the various phases of Foucauldian thought and their respective relationships to possible ecological outcomes: the Dionysian phase, which lasts until The Order of Things; the microphysics of power phase, in which a philosophy of the will that radically breaks with any idea of the original becomes central; and the late Foucault phase, characterised by the themes of the hermeneutics of the self, subjectivity and critique. In the latter period in particular, in which Foucault's rapprochement with Canguilhem and the idea of a living being immersed in a dialectical relationship with the environment and with others is very strong, a model is identified that is particularly amenable to interpretation in ecological terms. The essay concludes with some research hypotheses on the possible relationship between a philosophy of the will, such as that mediated by Foucault from Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, and ecology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of coercion, which is generally understood as one person forcing, pressuring, or using some kind of force to make another person do what he or she wants, is a fairly new concept in the history of philosophy that we encounter in contemporary philosophy. Therefore, the concept of coercion has an important place in contemporary philosophy, and studies on the concept of coercion are generally located within contemporary philosophy. The first study on the concept of coercion is Robert Nozick's (d. 2002) "Coercion" published in 1969. In this work, Nozick focused on analyzing the concept of coercion. At the same time, Nozick aimed to clarify some of the concepts related to the analysis of the concept of coercion. He explained the concept of coercion through the concept of proposal, which encompasses the concepts of threat and offer. Threats and offers are also considered in relation to the freedom and responsibility of individuals for their actions in a moral sense. Since threats are necessary for Nozick to recognize that an action is coerced, it is necessary to distinguish well whether the action is coerced or not. For this reason, Nozick leaves some of his examples without reaching a conclusion or decision. In fact, Nozick's aim is to do research on the concept of coercion and he tells us this at the very beginning. Similarly, since his work is based on a research on coercion, the questions, examples, and the problems that arise from them are well discussed. A number of propositions and examples are constructed, and solutions to the questions and problems encountered in the research are proposed, while others remain as they are without any offer or decision. Nozick also explores the concept of coercion in a moral sense. According to him, the concept of coercion restricts human freedom, and its moral meaning is very important. Because the concept of coercion also has a distinctive role in people's actions. This, in turn, affects human relations along with actions. According to Nozick, coercion in the performance of an action depends on the coerced person's acceptance of it. According to him, if this condition is not met in the claim of coercion, then the action is not an example of coercion. The biggest support for this idea is the idea of responsibility. The fact that Nozick's concept of coercion, especially the concept of coercion in a moral sense, has addressed the question of how to evaluate the actions in a moral sense in the studies on coercion and has enabled the emergence of various views on this issue. Therefore, Nozick's research on the concept of coercion has important influences on the subsequent studies on the concept of coercion. Likewise, Nozick's work has served as a guide and model for later studies on coercion. These studies, which started with Nozick, continue to be discussed today. When we look at the studies on the concept of coercion, it is understood that these analyzes are carried out due to the need to establish a basis for the concept of coercion and to determine a criterion. One of the most prominent reasons for this can be said to be the need for the concept of coercion to have a definition that encompasses basic disciplines other than philosophy. In this respect, when we look at the philosophical analysis of coercion, especially in contemporary philosophy, it would not be wrong to say that this is mostly done analytically. This shows that the concept of coercion is not that clear. Moreover, it is an indication that this concept is not understood well enough. As a result of all these, it is obvious that analysis has an important role to play in understanding the studies and views on coercion. In this respect, these explanations utilize different concepts and ideas to explain the concept of coercion. For this reason, it is necessary to analyze the interpretations of Nozick's ideas on the concept of coercion based on his ideas. In this respect, the subject of this article is to shed light on and explain the studies on the concept of coercion in contemporary philosophy. The aim of this article is to analyze the propositions and examples created to explain the concept of coercion and to discuss whether they are sufficient or not. In doing so, objections and interpretations to Nozick's idea of coercion will be included from time to time. Moreover, it is intended to contribute to the literature and shed light on the debates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the popular computer game with the succinct title Raft one continually recovers items and material from the ocean in order to adapt a makeshift vessel, building it to unseen dimensions. As in many other games, survival is experienced as casual and amusing gameplay. In desperate isolation, one is flooded with an overabundance of stuff, mirroring our present consumerist capitalism. This can be taken not only as a symptom of the current atmosphere of dystopian realism and mainstreaming of the survival genre, but also as a productive hint or allegory for philosophy. The seemingly inhuman and desolate ocean is full of things and potential. This is a potential that should of course be extended beyond the primitive accumulation of the Raft, because survival is prevalent not only in pop culture and gaming; we can find it to a similar degree also in contemporary philosophy. We can also categorize the poetic survivalism of new materialist thinkers (Donna Haraway, Rosi Braidotti), “thirst for annihilation” (Nick Land), theorization of current situation as a form of civil war (Alliez and Lazzarato), the (cosmic) pessimism of other speculative thinkers (Quentin Meillassoux, Ray Brassier, Eugene Thacker) or even the pop catastrophism of some ooo proponents (Timothy Morton). In gaming as well as in contemporary thinking, the demand to address the dystopian contours of our time are demands for ontology. Rather than presenting a criticism of these games and theories, we can frame them within such an economy and demand for ontology.

This essay traces a thread between the Novak’s philosophical and theological contribution and the economic and ethical reflection on the commons. Although present embryonically, these interconnections have not been taken into consideration so far. This convergence will be presented through three interrelated stages: a sound theological background, Scholastic reasoning and the evolution of the idea of common goods. From these points some interesting insights will emerge.

Copyright of Revista de Filosofía UIS is the property of Universidad Industrial de Santander and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

We live in a time of civilization breakthrough. Human activity aimed at the submission of the natural environment resulted in its devastation with disastrous consequences. Scientific predictions published since October 2018 show the threat of a global climate catastrophe in the coming years as an inevitable scenario unless we counteract it effectively. Preventing the catastrophe is becoming one of the most pressing problems facing the world today. This article examines the ways contemporary philosophy is addressing this issue, arguing that in fact there is no specific philosophical reaction to the climate catastrophe and advancing an explanation of such a striking negligence.

Copyright of Beytulhikme: An International Journal of Philosophy is the property of Beytulhikme: An International Journal of Philosophy and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper aims to show how a teleological model of reality and knowledge can be of aid in order to understand the connection between objective knowledge and subjective experience. The separation between them seems indeed to have been established by an opposite deterministic ontological and epistemological model within modern philosophy, which does not allow to explain the subjective relevance of objective knowledge and the objective relevance of subjective experience. In order to overcome this aporetic dichotomy, the paper will underline the actuality of the Aristotelian teleological conception of knowledge and experience and its heritage especially in contemporary philosophy.

In the contemporary epistemological scenario, marked by a plurality of disciplinary approaches, it is by no means obvious that philosophy is considered, as it once was, the natural interlocutor of theology. Fully positioning itself in this context, Theobald's theological thought owes much to the dialogic relationship with some contemporary philosophers. Three of them are considered in these pages: Maurice Merleau-Ponty, as regards the elaboration of the category of style; Jürgen Habermas, about the appreciation of modernity and the considerations on communicative action; Paul Ricoeur, in reference to narrativity and attestation, along with the ethical and theological reflection on the Golden Rule. Finally, some reflections on the specific rationality of theological knowledge are proposed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In contemporary philosophy of mind, naturalist theory is dominant in areas where there are attempts to explain what a human being is. Naturalism is roughly the idea that reality contains no supernatural element. In the field of the mind-body problem, this idea often stands out in a reductionist manner. When the mind is wanted to be reduced to the body, sometimes the naturalistic explanation of mental phenomena such as qualia, intentionality, free will, and language does not seem sufficient. Therefore, there are cases where the explanatory power of naturalism on mental phenomena is weak. This article aims to explain Chomsky’s critique of naturalism and at the same time the construction of his own naturalism, who realizes that the explanatory power of naturalism is weak. In this direction firstly, naturalism and its problems are tried to be explained. Then, the ground of Chomsky’s criticism of naturalism is mentioned. Methodological naturalism, which is Chomsky’s alternative naturalism, which is the naturalist understanding produced by the ground in question, is included. Chomsky provided supporting data to methodological naturalism through the philosophy of science. In this context, Chomsky’s criticisms of situations where the ideal of inter-scientific unity turns into an ideology of scientism are mentioned. Chomsky, with examples from the history of science, mentions that some phenomena that are outside the scope of science may enter the limits of science over time. While defending the obedience to the rules and method set by science, he also develops a theory of naturalism by criticizing the limits of science. Chomsky explains methodological naturalism through his views on linguistics. For this reason, the meaning of Chomskyan linguistic views in methodological naturalism are clarified in this study. As a result, it is possible to say that Chomskyan understanding of science and language theory both approve and criticize naturalism, producing a moderate, acceptable form of naturalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We live in a time of civilization breakthrough. Human activity aimed at the submission of the natural environment resulted in its devastation with disastrous consequences. Scientific predictions published since October 2018 show the threat of a global climate catastrophe in the coming years as an inevitable scenario unless we counteract it effectively. Preventing the catastrophe is becoming one of the most pressing problems facing the world today. This article examines the ways contemporary philosophy is addressing this issue, arguing that in fact there is no specific philosophical reaction to the climate catastrophe and advancing an explanation of such a striking negligence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Toruńskie Studia Polsko-Włoskie / Studi Polacco-Italiani di Toruń is the property of Nicolaus Copernicus University in Torun, Faculty of Law & Administration and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Jurisprudence Faculty Journal / Magallaẗ Kulliyyaẗ Al-fiqh is the property of Republic of Iraq Ministry of Higher Education & Scientific Research (MOHESR) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this contribution we first sketch an outline of the concept of lifeworld (Lebenswelt), to introduce the readers to the guest-edited collection of essays Varieties of the Lifeworld: Phenomenology and Aesthetic Experience, special issue of the "Continental Philosophy Review." We trace back the origin of the concept of lifeworld to Husserl's late phenomenology, although also explaining (on the basis of the careful historical-conceptual reconstructions offered by some distinguished scholars of Husserl and the phenomenological movement) that the development of Husserl's phenomenology of the Lebenswelt was gradual and was connected, among other things, to the question of the natural world of experience. Then, quickly referring to Gadamer, Landgrebe, Fink and other authors belonging to the phenomenological tradition, we explain that different interpretations of the topic "Lifeworld" in Husserl's thinking have been provided: In our view, this contributes to the fact that still nowadays this topic is a fascinating and philosophically stimulating one. Finally, making reference to more recent works by such authors as Figal, Gallagher, Zahavi and Shusterman (a pragmatist philosopher, whose somaesthetics is nonetheless very rich in insights that can be connected to phenomenological views of the body and its place in the world), we emphasize how the question concerning the lifeworld is still capable today to open a great variety of perspectives and plurality of paths for thinking, as testified by the essays collected in this guest-edited special issue of the "Continental Philosophy Review." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Merleau-Ponty and Contemporary Philosophy is an ambitious collected volume of fourteen chapters, accompanied by an epilogue by Jean-Luc Nancy, in which current Merleau-Ponty scholars together aim to demonstrate the urgent relevance of Merleau-Ponty to contemporary philosophy across a range of fields including ontology, epistemology, anthropology, embodiment, animality, politics, language, aesthetics, and art. Divided into four thematic sections, namely, “Legacies”, “Mind and Nature”, “Politics, Power, and Institution” and “Art and Aesthetics”, this collected volume provides a rich resource for Merleau-Ponty scholars who are interested in novel applications and understudied aspects of his thought. It also opens up Merleau-Ponty’s oeuvre to the general reader, presenting many possible entry-ways into the diversity of his work. In my review of Merleau-Ponty and Contemporary Philosophy, I suggest that each of its thematic sections could have been the subject of a separate volume themselves, and that the volume would then perhaps have not suffered from a number of poorly developed lines of argumentation. But I consider that the inclusion of all these thematically diverse sections in a single volume nonetheless presents a forceful display of the wide-ranging relevance of Merleau-Ponty’s work to contemporary philosophy.

At a time when narrow scientific and philosophical specialization dominates our "academic" landscape and by which respective competence is also measured, a thinking that unfolds in broad ways is always viewed with some suspicion. This, however, is not the case of Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics. Even though it has triggered various debates, e.g. on the part of Habermas, Derrida, Ricoeur and others, Gadamer's influence and impact is still present today in the most diverse fields of philosophy and the humanities. The editorial takes up some of these debates and shows their continuing effects today.

Copyright of Journal of Abant Social Sciences / Abant Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi is the property of Journal of Abant Social Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

La animalidad es un tema recurrente en la obra narrativa de Antonio Di Benedetto. En este artículo, me enfocaré en uno de sus más célebres relatos, “Caballo en el salitral” (1961). A partir de algunos conceptos de Jakob Von Uexküll (mundo circundante), Martin Heidegger (pobreza de mundo y perturbamiento) y Jacques Derrida (sobrevida), este trabajo propone una lectura de “Caballo en el salitral” que intenta exceder la reducción simbólica del relato a su significación humana. En contraste, conjetura una apuesta especulativa en torno a las nociones de organismo, animalidad, vida y muerte en las que convergen la imaginación literaria, filosófica y científica. Animality is a recurring subject in the narrative work of Antonio Di Benedetto. In this article, I focus on one of his most famous stories, “Caballo en el salitral” (1961). Based on some concepts of Jakob Von Uexküll (surrounding-world), Martin Heidegger (poverty of world and captivation) and Jacques Derrida (survival), this paper proposes a reading of “Caballo en el salitral” that attempts to exceed the symbolic reduction of the story to its human significance. By contrast, we conjecture a speculative commitment to the notions of organism, animality, life and death in which literary, philosophical and scientific imagination converge.

Copyright of Comprendre: Revista Catalana de Filosofía is the property of Herder Editorial S.L. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Adab Al-Basrah is the property of Republic of Iraq Ministry of Higher Education & Scientific Research (MOHESR) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In recent years, more and more philosophy scholars have been practicing what social sciences commonly refer to as “fieldwork”. However, what one may call “field philosophy” raises a number of specific issues. What is fieldwork in philosophy? Why should philosophers engage in fieldwork? How can they proceed both in theory and in practice? The present paper draws on the two-day conference that took place in Lyon in 2019 bringing together philosophy scholars and PhD students who conducted fieldwork in the domains of health and ecology. Based on these discussions, we question the objects, forms, methods, and aims of this approach, while proposing some methodological milestones. As a method that is rooted in the philosophical tradition all the while being concerned with its ongoing topicality, field philosophy as we understand it contributes to enriching the philosophical discipline in its bibliographical and historian traditions, and to elucidating the relationship between philosophy and society. We believe that a community of inquiry is thus crucial in fostering methodological creativity and in continuing to elaborate on the aims and methods of this practice.

Ordóñez Burgos, Jorge. On the Philosophy of Our Moment. The relationship between philosophy and its history has been--and still is--a topic that calls for not only an extensive knowledge of sources and traditions, but also a deep reflective exercise in which historiography, philology, and the philosophical review of philosophy itself complement one another in an interrelated whole. In this text I propose to meditate on the modalities that today can have as a framework in which philosophy develops and, at the same time, as a point of departure for a philosophy of "this moment." The present, contemporariness, the philosophy of our time, current philosophy and the philosophical avant--garde cannot be understood as synonyms because each term situates itself differently in the circumstances. The philosophy of today can be a topic of interest for Latin America, a region with a vocation and realities that are very different from those of Europe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this article is to analyze various interpretations of the term «ontologization» in domestic and foreign scientific literature, and search for the most authentic interpretation. Differential and intuitive interpretation of this concept is increasingly found in scientific circles, the reason for this is the tendency to assert the fundementality of reality, thanks to the development of ontological and epistemological pluralism. The etymological approach to the disclosure of the peculiarities of awareness «of ontological» was used essentially. The linguistic component is elevated to the rank of the basic methodological principle. Thus the essentialetymological appeal to the problem originates from the consideration of the meaning of a word, moving on gradually to the disclosure of the features of awareness of the area of existence, which is indicated by this word [1, p. 43]. The following interpretation of the term «ontology» in contemporary Russian philosophical discourse was identified: the objectification, identification, design, bithisarea. In foreign studies, there is an interpretation of this term as a construct that is not a true reality, or through the prism of cognitive psychology to refer to the categorical exceptions of some «distinctive» group of people and the creation of outgroups. According to the author’s opinion, the most authentic interpretation of this term is proposed. Ontologization is the process of comparing the object of knowledge with the logos of its existence, the purpose of which is the search for truth. The practical significance of the correct understanding and use of the term «ontologization», especially in the Humanities, is demonstrated. So, in order for knowledge not to remain in the realm of the abstract or speculative, it must be ontologized. One of the reasons is the most important mode of ontologization process, it is the participation of truth as the basis of valuable and integral knowledge.

This paper aims at the presentation of ethical and political grounds of the pedagogy of asylum, which, in its assumptions, refers to concepts of such thinkers as Emmanuel Levinas, Erich Fromm, George Steiner, Hannah Arendt, Michael Walzer, Avishai Margalit, Jacques Derrida and Janusz Korczak. Utopia of hospitality, presented in its basic assumptions, constitutes a look at the social life, life of individuals and communities, as concentrated in asylums, while its author thinks that it forms an answer to modern challenges to Western democracies, education and politics in the “Age of Migration”. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The death of God thesis is a siginificant one when it comes to the contemporary philosophy of religion. In this article we will try to present this thesis in the light of Gianni Vattimo’s philosophy in order to clarify the meaning of the death of God and also to critisize it. The article will be divided into three sections. The aim of the first one will be to show the ways in which the death od God thesis should not be understood. The aim of the second will be to present the actual meaning of the thesis. And the third one will be devoted to the critique of Gianni Vattimo’s philosophy of religion which constitutes itself as a result of accepting the death of God thesis.

The story of Abraham – and the divine command to sacrifice his son Isaac – is, as many of us know, the source of inspiration for some reflections of Kierkegaard in his work Fear and Trembling. From this episode, Johannes de Silentio, the pseudony- mous author of the work, who makes an ode to faith as the highest of the passions, also wonders about a problem that, according to his interpretation, seems central, i.e. the teleological suspension of morality. The objective of this paper is to investigate, especially from the reflections of Kierkegaard, a possible interpretation for the teleo- logical suspension of morality and in what circumstances such a thing does occur and where we can insert it in the ethical debates of philosophy of the nineteenth century.

In the present article we reconsider space as a fundamental category to assess both "the common" and the actual violence exerted against it. This approach stems historically from the modern point of view in 20th century's language philosophy. Nevertheless, it serves as a point of departure for a general consideration over structure and space natures. Such an enterprise to vindicate the role of space in philosophy, so called, in order to reach the same dignification as time. We first address its cognitive dimension, then its linguistical structure and finally arrive to a proper "spatial reading". We advance in the thesis that a human being requires a common space, imagined through a topology. At the final remarks, we offer some cues to think contemporary common space to shed light on different sorts of violence directed against it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bajo Palabra: Journal of Philosophy is the property of Bajo Palabra: Journal of Philosophy and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Imagination is one of the basic concepts and even the "vital element" of phenomenology. The present article is dedicated to this topic and is mainly based on vol. XXIII of Husserliana. Imagination has played a major role in the process of abstraction, in the constitution of time, of the other, and also of fictional beings (for example, a centaur playing the flute). In this article, the focus will be on fantasia, which is close to imagination and the subject of which is fantasmata. The question concerns the image for consciousness, which is doubled first with the appearing image-object (Bildobjekt, fictum) and then with the intended but absent imagesubject (Bildsujet, imaginatum). Sign-consciousness thus frees up the place of image for consciousness. These phenomena of fantasia have the multifaceted character of an "unspeakable emptiness," with vague, discontinuous contours emerging momentarily. Although this analysis brings fantasia closer to authentic intuition, it is innovative in relation to the tradition which inspired Marc Richir in his project of re-establishing phenomenology and developing a new genetic phenomenology. Without speaking of a new phenomenology, the problem of fantasia fits into Husserl's systematics, more precisely, noetics, as part of the formative forms. There is no choice but to give the imagination, as a pure game, rules, aesthetic rules, since aesthetics is a part of this "phenomenology of intuitive presentifications." This is the area of fantasia no. 2, "perceptive fantasia," which is the core of the "phenomenology of theatricality" that belongs to noematics. The ultimate purpose of these "fantastic" researches is to understand the genesis of "homo imaginans.". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Academic Journal of Philosophy / Felsefi Düşün is the property of Pinhan Yayincilik and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper is a book review of Professor Theodore George's recent book, The Responsibility to Understand: Hermeneutical Contours of Ethical Life, published by Edinburgh University Press (2020). The review is directed towards not only the book itself but its applicability to applied hermeneutics and the ways that hermeneutic philosophy and hermeneutics research have been taken up in practice disciplines. Not written as a typical book review, this paper is more of a dialogue and conversation I had, and continue to have, with the book. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]