Lorenzo C. Simpson

As humanity becomes increasingly interconnected through globalization, the question of whether community is possible within culturally diverse societies has returned as a principal concern for contemporary thought. Lorenzo Simpson charges that the current discussion is stuck at an impasse-between postmodernism's fragmented notions of cultural difference and humanism's homogeneous versions of community. Simpson proposes an alternative-one that bridges cultural differences without erasing them. He argues that we must establish common aesthetic and ethical standards incorporating sensitivity to difference if we are to achieve cross-cultural understanding.

The relationship between hermeneutics and Critical Theory is often understood in terms of Paul Ricoeur’s opposition of a hermeneutics of meaning recovery to a hermeneutics of suspicion. I propose to bridge this divide between recovery and suspicion by leveraging the idea that the legitimacy of a society is a function of the adequacy of its self-understanding and by suggesting that a fundamental way in which illegitimate social power operates is through the strategic promulgation and policing of the semantic resources available to individuals for their own self-understanding and agency. I argue that hermeneutic democracy, one that promotes participation in the interpretive practices that generate collectively binding and enabling social meanings, is an antidote to such illegitimate re-strictions on the agency of individuals and social groups. La relation entre l’herméneutique et la théorie critique est souvent comprise en termes d’opposition que fait Paul Ricoeur entre une herméneutique de la récupération du sens et une herméneutique de la suspicion. Je propose de combler cet écart entre récupération et suspicion en exploitant l’idée selon laquelle la légitimité d’une so-ciété est fonction de l’adéquation de sa compréhension de soi et en suggérant qu’un moyen fondamental par lequel le pouvoir social illégitime opère est à travers la promulgation stratégique et la sur-veillance des ressources sémantiques disponibles aux individus pour leur propre compréhension de soi et leur agentivité. Je soutiens qu’une démocratie herméneutique, qui promeut la participation aux pratiques interprétatives générant des signi????ications sociales collectivement contraignantes et habilitantes, est un antidote à ces restrictions illégitimes sur l’agentivité des individus et des groupes sociaux.

As humanity becomes increasingly interconnected through globalization, the question of whether community is possible within culturally diverse societies has returned as a principal concern for contemporary thought. Lorenzo Simpson charges that the current discussion is stuck at an impasse-between postmodernism's fragmented notions of cultural difference and humanism's homogeneous versions of community. Simpson proposes an alternative-one that bridges cultural differences without erasing them. He argues that we must establish common aesthetic and ethical standards incorporating sensitivity to difference if we are to achieve cross-cultural understanding.

The relationship between hermeneutics and Critical Theory is often understood in terms of Paul Ricoeur’s opposition of a hermeneutics of meaning recovery to a hermeneutics of suspicion. I propose to bridge this divide between recovery and suspicion by leveraging the idea that the legitimacy of a society is a function of the adequacy of its self-understanding and by suggesting that a fundamental way in which illegitimate social power operates is through the strategic promulgation and policing of the semantic resources available to individuals for their own self-understanding and agency. I argue that hermeneutic democracy, one that promotes participation in the interpretive practices that generate collectively binding and enabling social meanings, is an antidote to such illegitimate re-strictions on the agency of individuals and social groups. La relation entre l’herméneutique et la théorie critique est souvent comprise en termes d’opposition que fait Paul Ricoeur entre une herméneutique de la récupération du sens et une herméneutique de la suspicion. Je propose de combler cet écart entre récupération et suspicion en exploitant l’idée selon laquelle la légitimité d’une so-ciété est fonction de l’adéquation de sa compréhension de soi et en suggérant qu’un moyen fondamental par lequel le pouvoir social illégitime opère est à travers la promulgation stratégique et la sur-veillance des ressources sémantiques disponibles aux individus pour leur propre compréhension de soi et leur agentivité. Je soutiens qu’une démocratie herméneutique, qui promeut la participation aux pratiques interprétatives générant des signi????ications sociales collectivement contraignantes et habilitantes, est un antidote à ces restrictions illégitimes sur l’agentivité des individus et des groupes sociaux.

This book aims to develop the tradition of philosophical hermeneutics, the theoretical account of interpretive (as opposed to explanatory) understanding--the account of meanings and contexts rather than causes and predictions--usually restricted to the domain of literary and textual analysis, in new directions by exploiting its potential as an instrument of critique. It refutes commonly held claims that hermeneutic analyses are necessarily relativistic, Eurocentric, or critically impotent and demonstrates how hermeneutic procedures can inform analyses of urgent current and cross-cultural issues such as the biology of race, female genital excision, and the so-called "culture of poverty" thesis. Lorenzo Simpson demonstrates that a robust methodology of philosophical hermeneutics is well positioned to intervene in critical political and social issues in global ethics and justice in concert with critical theory's emancipatory aims.

As humanity becomes increasingly interconnected through globalization, the question of whether community is possible within culturally diverse societies has returned as a principal concern for contemporary thought. Lorenzo Simpson charges that the current discussion is stuck at an impasse-between postmodernism's fragmented notions of cultural difference and humanism's homogeneous versions of community. Simpson proposes an alternative-one that bridges cultural differences without erasing them. He argues that we must establish common aesthetic and ethical standards incorporating sensitivity to difference if we are to achieve cross-cultural understanding.

In this thoughtful essay Wallulis argues that a rethinking of Gadamer's seminal claims about our historical situatedness is necessary if we are to have an adequate account of personal achievement. He argues that in stressing that we are the effect of tradition, Gadamer does not allow personal initiative its due. Wallulis wants to oppose a consciousness of "having been enabled" to what he sees as Gadamer's exclusive emphasis on a consciousness of being affected by history, as well as to Habermas's notion of a consciousness oriented towards emancipation, that is, towards overcoming pseudo-natural constraints and attaining complete self-transparency. While sympathetic to Gadamer's hermeneutic critique of Habermas, Wallulis wants to offer a corrective to Gadamer's one-sided focus and thereby to elaborate a "hermeneutic of life history" that does justice to personal achievement.