In this paper we would like to compare two philosophical interpretations of Freud which seemingly occupy a similar position in the aforementioned two-sides schema. Paul Ricoeur‘s and Richard Rorty‘s interpretations of Freud lie quite clearly on the second side of the schema – the side of interpretation, motives, reasons, meaning. In a nutshell, they would both agree that psychoanalysis, sometimes even beyond Freud‘s allegedly biologist intentions has somehow extended the realm of human events provided with meaning, which can be the possible object of interpretation. The second point is that, even if placing themselves on the linguistic side of the schema, neither of them wishes to dismiss what is going on the first side – that is to say, drives, impulses, force, etc. They both try to play between the lines, while keeping a steady position on the first side. More specifically, this paper has two main goals. The first is to compare the interpretations of Freud's thought by two leading figures of 20th century philosophy. While significantly similar, their positions diverge at specific points, and to our knowledge this is the first attempt to compare them in this way. The second goal is that of fostering a dialogue between a pragmatist and a hermeneutic reading of psychoanalysis. Our hypothesis is that a pragmatist standpoint could help in integrating and reconstructing the most insightful and productive insights coming from a hermeneutical standpoint.
Ricoeur's and Rorty's narratives of the unconscious. Integrating hermeneutics with pragmatism
matteo santarelli
;
2019
Abstract
In this paper we would like to compare two philosophical interpretations of Freud which seemingly occupy a similar position in the aforementioned two-sides schema. Paul Ricoeur‘s and Richard Rorty‘s interpretations of Freud lie quite clearly on the second side of the schema – the side of interpretation, motives, reasons, meaning. In a nutshell, they would both agree that psychoanalysis, sometimes even beyond Freud‘s allegedly biologist intentions has somehow extended the realm of human events provided with meaning, which can be the possible object of interpretation. The second point is that, even if placing themselves on the linguistic side of the schema, neither of them wishes to dismiss what is going on the first side – that is to say, drives, impulses, force, etc. They both try to play between the lines, while keeping a steady position on the first side. More specifically, this paper has two main goals. The first is to compare the interpretations of Freud's thought by two leading figures of 20th century philosophy. While significantly similar, their positions diverge at specific points, and to our knowledge this is the first attempt to compare them in this way. The second goal is that of fostering a dialogue between a pragmatist and a hermeneutic reading of psychoanalysis. Our hypothesis is that a pragmatist standpoint could help in integrating and reconstructing the most insightful and productive insights coming from a hermeneutical standpoint.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
