The paper deals with the ontological questions related to tradition, especially focusing on Gadamer and Dilthey. It is argued that tradition should be regarded not that much as a limitation, but rather as an enabling finitude that gives access to reality. This ontological structure concerns several aspects of human existence, nomothetic science included. Historical background thus has an ontological impact that surpasses objectivistic approaches. A short discussion of causality in natural science traces the genealogy of the causal scheme and compares (...) the notion of effect with the Wirkung in the sense of effective history. In this context the difference between the modern scientific concept of nature and the natura of the elder tradition appears to be important in order to understand the specificity of Diltheyan philosophy of life. There seems to be a complementary relation between hermeneutics and philosophy of life insofar as both currents are trying to reinstall the modern subject in reality, Gadamers main concern being the historical incarnation in a process, profoundly marked by language and Dilthey still trying to save part of nature in history. These two aspects can be regarded as almost direct answers to the inverse Cartesian tendency to liberate the subject from its history and from its bodily nature. Experience and lived experience thus seem less contradictory than some passages in Gadamers Truth and Method would suggest. (shrink)

Hermeneutics should take Gadamer’s claims about experience and reality seriously, the hermeneutic urgency, described in the following concise ways: aus der Wahrheit des Erinnerns etwas entgegensetzen: das immer noch und immer wieder Wirkliche. WuM, p. XXVIeine Erfahrung, die Wirklichkeit erfährt und selber wirklich ist. WuM, p. 329.Die Erfahrung lehrt, Wirkliches anzuerkennen. WuM, p. 339.preceded by a general remark about the aim of historical knowledge:eine Erkenntnis, die versteht, daß etwas so ist, weil sie versteht, daß es so gekommen ist. WuM, p. (...) 2This indicates an ontological primacy of history, which is a singular processual event with a certain narrative dimension which can also be called history. Through this essential and at the same time particular finitude, meaning is given to us – and all the general aspects of explained reality are possible only inside such an effective history which unites event and narration. The article will elaborate the special character of historical effects compared to the effects in the modern scheme of cause and effect and suggest a way of reading the classical distinction between understanding and explanation in a way which differs somewhat from Gadamer’s, but also from Georg Henrik von Wright’s similar concerns. It is also argued that Dilthey’s notion of lived experience remains relevant inside a very much needed hermeneutic effort to include nature in history. (shrink)