Philosophy Dictionary of Arguments

Home Screenshot Tabelle Begriffe

 
Author Item Summary Meta data
Gadamer I 356
Induction/Aristotle/Gadamer: Aristotle describes (...) in the appendix of his second analytics(1) (and quite similarly in the first chapter of metaphysics) how many individual perceptions, by keeping the manifoldness of the many individuals, finally result in experience, the one unity of experience. What is this unity? Apparently it is the unity of a general. But the generality of experience is not yet the generality of science. Rather, it occupies a remarkably indeterminate middle position in Aristotle's work between the many individual perceptions and the true generality of the concept. It is from the generality of the concept that science and technology take their starting point. But what is the generality of experience, and how does it merge into the new generality of the Logos? >Generality/Aristotle.
If experience shows us that a certain remedy has a certain effect, it means that something common has been seen out of a wealth of observations, and it is clear that only from such an assured observation the actual medical question, that of science, becomes possible: the question of the Logos. >Logos/Aristoteles.
Science knows why, for what reason, this remedy has a healing effect.
Experience: Experience is not science itself, but it is a necessary condition for it. It must already be secured, i.e. the individual observations must regularly show the same. Only then, when the generality of experience has already been reached, can the question about the reason and thus the question that leads to science begin.
GadamerVsAristotle: The relationship between experiencing, keeping and the resulting
unity of experience remains conspicuously unclear. Obviously Aristotle build here upon a train of thought that in his time already
Gadamer I 357
had a certain classical imprint. We can prove it in its oldest testimony for Anaxagoras, of whom Plutarch has handed down to us that the distinction of the human over animals was determined by Empeiria, Mneme, Sophia and Techne(2).
We find a similar connection with the emphasis of the "mnemes" in the Prometheus of Aeschylus(3), and although we miss the corresponding emphasis of the "mnemes" in the Platonic Protagoras myth, Plato(4) as well as Aristotle show that this is already a fixed theory. The remaining of important perceptions (moné) is apparently the connecting motive through which the knowledge of the general is able to rise from the experience of the individual. >Unity/Aristotle, >Science/Aristotle.


1. An. Post. B 19 (99ff.)
2. Plut. de fort. 3 p. 98 F = Diels, Vors. Anaxag. B 21 b.
3. Aisch. Prom. 461.
4. Phaid. 96.


_____________
Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.
The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.

Gadamer I
Hans-Georg Gadamer
Wahrheit und Methode. Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik 7. durchgesehene Auflage Tübingen 1960/2010

Gadamer II
H. G. Gadamer
The Relevance of the Beautiful, London 1986
German Edition:
Die Aktualität des Schönen: Kunst als Spiel, Symbol und Fest Stuttgart 1977


Send Link
> Counter arguments against Aristotle
> Counter arguments in relation to Induction

Authors A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Y   Z  


Concepts A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z  



Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2020-08-11
Legal Notice   Contact   Data protection declaration