Language and understandability. About the translation of the semantic content of religious discourse

Authors

  • Gonzalo Scivoletto Universidad NAcinal de Cuyo, Argentina. Instituto de Ciencias Humanas, Sociales y Ambientales INCIHUSA – CONICET, Argentina.

Keywords:

Interculturality, Institutionalization, Discourse

Abstract

One of the framework conditions for the realization of a practical discourse is the possibility of using a common or "universally understandable" language for all those involved in the discourse. This condition becomes more complex to the extent that the interlocutors come from linguistic communities or life forms very strange to each other. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to reflect on the characteristics and difficulties of applied discourse ethics or, more precisely, the institutionalization of practical discourses in complex or semantically dense intercultural contexts. First, the difference between conceptual misunderstanding and disagreement (theoretical or practical) is presented through an example - the concept of myth -. In the second point, two fragments of Habermas are analysed to show the difficulties regarding the character that the claims of sense or comprehensibility have and their eventual resolution in a hermeneutical discourse. In the third point, some reflections on translation are presented as a possible criterion for the resolution of claims of meaning or comprehensibility -for this, Habermas's interventions on the translation of religious language in the public sphere are taken as a case of analysis.

Author Biography

  • Gonzalo Scivoletto, Universidad NAcinal de Cuyo, Argentina. Instituto de Ciencias Humanas, Sociales y Ambientales INCIHUSA – CONICET, Argentina.
    Doctor en Filosofía por la Universidad Nacional de Lanús. Profesor de Grado Universitario en Filosofía en la Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Ha sido becario doctoral (2010-2015) y posdoctoral (2015-2017) del Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), con lugar de trabajo en el Instituto de Ciencias Humanas, Sociales y Ambientales (INCIHUSA – CCT Mendoza). Actualmente se desempeña como docente en la Universidad Nacional de Cuyo y es Miembro de la Red Internacional de Ética del Discurso.

References

Apel, K.-O. (1997), “Plurality of Good? The Problem of Affirmative Tolerance in a Multicultural Society from an Ethical Point of View”, Ratio Juris 10, 2: 199-212.

Apel, K.-O. (1998), Auseinandersetzungen in Erprobung des transzendentalpragmatischen Ansatzes, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Apel, K.-O. (2001), The Response of Discourse Ethics to the Moral Challenge of the Human Situation as Such and Specially Today, Leuven: Peeters.

Apel, K.-O. (2008), “The hermeneutics of Being versus transcendental hermeneutics or transcendental pragmatics”, en The Routledge Companion to Twenty Century Philosophy, London and New York: Routledge, 736-783.

Apel, K.-O. (2009), Semiótica filosófica, Buenos Aires: Prometeo Libros.

Apel, K.-O. (2013), Paradigmas de filosofía primera, Buenos Aires: Prometeo Libros.

Böhler, D. (1982), “Transzendentalpragmatik und kritische Moral. Über die Möglichkeit und die moralische Bedeutung einer Selbstaufklärung der Vernunft”, en Kuhlmann, W. y Böhler, D. (eds.), Kommunikation und Reflexion. Zur Diskussion der Transzendentalpragmatik Antworten auf Karl-Otto Apel, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

Burckhart, H. (2000), Nichthintergehbarkeit und Unverzichtbarkeit einer diskursethischen Begründung von Moral, en Burckhart, H. y Reich, K. (eds.), Begründung von Moral: Diskursethik versus Konstruktivismus, Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann.

Cook, M. (2015), “Translating truth”, Disponible en http://www.resetdoc.org/story/00000022223 (última consulta 30-10-2015).

Habermas, J. (1988), Pensamiento posmetafísico, Madrid: Trotta.

Habermas, J. (2010), Teoría de la acción comunicativa, Madrid: Trotta.

Habermas, J. (2015), Mundo de la vida, política y religión, Madrid: Trotta.

Lafont, C. (2002), The Linguistic Turn in Hermeneutic Philosophy, MIT Press.

Lafont, C. (2010), “Dos argumentos transcendentales contra la tesis de la inconmensurabilidad”, en Giusti, M. (ed.), Tolerancia. Conferencias plenarias del XV Congreso Interamericano de Filosofía y el II Congreso Iberoamericano de Filosofía, Madrid.

Petras, W. (2011), Sinnkonstitution und Geltungsrechtfertigung. Zum Verhältnis von transzendentaler Hermeneutik und Transzendentalpragmatik in Kontexten einer zureichenden Vernunftbegründung, Universität zu Köln (tesis doctoral inédita).

Wellmer, A. (1994), Ética y diálogo. Elementos del juicio moral en Kant y la ética del discurso, Barcelona: Anthropos.

Downloads

Published

2020-09-16

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Language and understandability. About the translation of the semantic content of religious discourse. (2020). Revista Ética Y Discurso, 2(2), 87-99. https://qellqasqa.com.ar/ojs/index.php/eyd/article/view/430