Ali Reza Azadi; Hamideh Izadinia
Volume 5, Issue 15 , September 2015, , Pages 101-127
Abstract
In spite of the fact that Prejudices, according to Gadamer, are “conditions of understanding”, their interference is not arbitrary. Understanding is not a one-sided relationship, ...
Read More
In spite of the fact that Prejudices, according to Gadamer, are “conditions of understanding”, their interference is not arbitrary. Understanding is not a one-sided relationship, imposing our own sense and subjectivity on others, but it is a dialogical approach. In this approach, unlike the Cartesian method in which the subject-object relationship is violent and immoral, we cannot overlook the otherness of the other. Appealing to the concept of play and distinguishing it from game, Gadamer reveals the reciprocating motion of understanding and its dialogical structure. Here, the other is not seen as an object; therefore, none of the interlocutors participate in dialogue is to dominate the other. Gadamer considers understanding and dialogue as a “fusion of horizons” in which each interlocutor engages with each other freely and has been involved in the issue. This authentic engagement in the process of understanding, according to Gadamer, means openness to the other. Openness, as a moral condition, is possible only in the dialectical structure of dialogue. Every questioning-answering dialogue begins with a real and serious question and indicates the ignorance of the truth of the matter. In fact, all our prejudices are evaluated and improved by listening to what the other says, we encounter others with the humility and patience that all are different expressions of an ethical process. To be open to Gadamer’s openness as a moral condition of dialogue and exploring its requirements are what we address in this paper.
