Date: January 13, 2021 02:49AM
If I take a stance in the debate, a fantasy that I stand ”outside” the dominant religion in the west and take a psychological position to get a ”perspective”. I end up with this.
Everybody starts with assumptions about humanity.
Enlightenment has the same problem as Christianity.
Sin = all people can not see or do anything right, they need work or grace (fight between camps)
Prejudice vs science = all People can not see or do anything right, they need scientific experts in their life. (ideological experts fight about who is right or wrong)
"Before Gadamer, hermeneutics (attempting to emulate the natural sciences) sought to determine the truth of texts with reference to a meaning that was the same at all places and at all times. However, Gadamer recognised that our necessary situatedness meant, not just that such a transcendental meaning was beyond us, but it did not ask the correct question—what were the conditions of interpretation? ... Most importantly however, to not recognise our initial throwness in which our traditions shape our understanding (our ‘effective historical consciousness) is to demonstrate what Gadamer referred to as Enlightenment thinking’s ‘prejudice toward prejudice’." ”http://criticallegalthinking.com/2016/06/17/hans-georg-gadamer-hermeneutics