Jesús Conill-Sancho. Ética hermenéutica. Crítica desde la facticidad. [Hermeneutic Ethics. The Critique of Facticity]. Madrid: Tecnos, 2006.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In ethical "histories" and "encyclopaedias," it is uncommon to find any chapters on hermeneutical ethics.This is rather curious, considering that the most significant representatives of contemporary moral and political philosophy come from a hermeneutic setting (Rawls, Walzer, Taylor, MacIntyre, Ricoeur, Rorty, Gadamer, Apel, Habermas, Vattimo).Why should there be such reluctance to talk specifically about hermeneutical ethics when its presence is unquestionable?Hermeneutics is often accused of lacking any critical sense, while one of the functions of philosophy is precisely to be critical.But when some hermeneutical thinkers put forward critical claims, they are reproved for forgetting the weight of facticity and the depth of experience.The purpose of this book is to overcome both the critical and the hermeneutical deficiencies by attempting to structure the demands of reason and life in a "hermeneutical ethics that is critical from facticity."The means of undertaking this consists in taking a hermeneutical approach to Kant through Dilthey, Heidegger, and Gadamer, and taking advantage of the most relevant initiatives in critical theory from the hermeneutical sphere itself: discursive ethics (Apel and Habermas), the ethics of otherness and recognition (Ricoeur), of authenticity (Taylor), and of pietas (Vattimo).This would be an impure hermeneutical ethics, open to scientific thought, as demanded by critical rationalism (Albert), and it assumes the facticity of vital experience but also that of scientific knowledge and technological transformations.This book sets out to prove that a new critical hermeneutics can be developed from facticity, and that it is possible to open up critical reflection from the hermeneutics of facticity, discovering the Kantian roots of this hermeneutics, to the extent of presenting a "hermeneuticizable" Kant.There are obvious difficulties involved in this endeavour, at least three of which are undeniable.First of all, it is not easy to hermeneuticize Kant due to the widespread acceptance of Gadamer's interpretation in Truth and Method, according to which the Critique of Judgment constitutes a subjectivizing deviation that prevents any model of hermeneutical thought from being put forward.The second difficulty stems from the Heideggerian influence, which has guided contemporary hermeneutics-particularly that of Gadamer, a faithful disciple of Heidegger-because its complex or, rather, tangled thought often seems indisposed to any ethics or, at least, to an ethics compatible with the modern critical spirit.Thirdly, it is also difficult to consider ethics as a central aspect of philosophical hermeneutics in the manner that I call the "Gadamerian way" (which goes from Dilthey to Gadamer through Heidegger) when
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".