Abstract

Preview: The status of philosophy of culture seems to be notoriously unclear. Since its birth as a methodologically self-aware discipline, it constantly provokes controversies and questions concerning its nature, scope, and objective field of cognitive interests. Is it to be conceived – as it was intended by Wilhelm Dilthey – as a kind of philosophical foundation for Geisteswissenschaften and even more specifically for Kulturwissenschaften – in which case it would play a parallel role to philosophy of science in its relation to natural sciences? Or is it to be understood as a kind of inter-discipline or trans-discipline whose task is to provide a synoptic view on the world we live in and try to understand? Or perhaps one should see it as a particular meta-philosophical orientation – understood rather in terms of a specific approach or a form of sensitivity than as a discipline which would be fully determined with regard to its methodology and objective field of cognitive interests? Or, as some scholars quite convincingly suggest, should be seen first and foremost as a way of life oriented around human intellectual and spiritual growth? Or still as something else? Furthermore, even if we assume a common agreement with regard to its nature and status among other philosophical disciplines as well as its relation to humanities and natural sciences – it does not mean that it will be followed by a similar agreement with regard to its most adequate methodological approach. Should it be: descriptive, archeological, critical, procesual, teleological, normative? Perhaps a synthesis comprising all of them? Or still something different?