Playing the game, one might also mention interpretive methods that make desires or drives primary, ones that make geography primary (Braudel), or ones that emphasize new technological developments (similar to Marx and other historicists, but not identical — H. G. Wells, Aldous Huxley, even Henry Ford).
But wait a moment — many of these thinkers seem to suffer from this schematic, including Deleuze who shows up in several competing categories. I think what you’ve done is interesting, and potentially helpful, but the rhetoric seems titled towards a despairing diagnosis of arbitrary hermeneutics. René Daumal said this on April 27th, 2007 at 4:25 am (edit) Thanks for the suggestions, Rene. I don’t think I’m trying to suggest that all these hermeneutics are arbitrary. I do think some are better than others. For instance, I have contempt for theohermeneutics and certain forms of pathohermeneutics (Lakoff), aesthetohermeneutics (logical positivism), and zoohermeneutics (evolutionary sociology and psychology). Mostly I’m just trying to get a catalogue together to have a clearer picture of how these interpretive strategies work. larvalsubjects said this on April 27th, 2007 at 1:34 pm (edit) More Hermeneutics Rene Daumal and Melanie have suggested some additional hermeneutics:
Technohermeneutics: This hermeneutics traces phenomena back to their technological conditions. Examples would be Kittler and Ong.
Libidohermeneutics: I’m amazed that I forgot this one. This hermeneutics traces phenomena back to drives, desire, and jouissance. Freud, Lacan, and Deleuze and Guattari would fall here.
Rene also suggests Geohermeneutics that traces phenomena back to their geography as in Braudel and certain moments in DeLanda’s earlier work.
To this I’d add Genderhermeneutics, that comprehends phenomena in terms of gender relations. ~ by larvalsubjects on April 27, 2007.
But wait a moment — many of these thinkers seem to suffer from this schematic, including Deleuze who shows up in several competing categories. I think what you’ve done is interesting, and potentially helpful, but the rhetoric seems titled towards a despairing diagnosis of arbitrary hermeneutics. René Daumal said this on April 27th, 2007 at 4:25 am (edit) Thanks for the suggestions, Rene. I don’t think I’m trying to suggest that all these hermeneutics are arbitrary. I do think some are better than others. For instance, I have contempt for theohermeneutics and certain forms of pathohermeneutics (Lakoff), aesthetohermeneutics (logical positivism), and zoohermeneutics (evolutionary sociology and psychology). Mostly I’m just trying to get a catalogue together to have a clearer picture of how these interpretive strategies work. larvalsubjects said this on April 27th, 2007 at 1:34 pm (edit) More Hermeneutics Rene Daumal and Melanie have suggested some additional hermeneutics:
Technohermeneutics: This hermeneutics traces phenomena back to their technological conditions. Examples would be Kittler and Ong.
Libidohermeneutics: I’m amazed that I forgot this one. This hermeneutics traces phenomena back to drives, desire, and jouissance. Freud, Lacan, and Deleuze and Guattari would fall here.
Rene also suggests Geohermeneutics that traces phenomena back to their geography as in Braudel and certain moments in DeLanda’s earlier work.
To this I’d add Genderhermeneutics, that comprehends phenomena in terms of gender relations. ~ by larvalsubjects on April 27, 2007.
No comments:
Post a Comment