Proceedings of the XXII World Congress of Philosophy

Living in “the Machine Age” (dem Maschinenzeitalter), we can not avoid asking ourselves, whether every one of us lives as "a Part" (ein Bestand) in the world much like a cog in “a Machine” (einer Maschine). Heidegger made this concept clear by his phenomenology. In addition, he regarded a human being as a special Part, that could transform all beings into Parts. In order to overcome this dangerous situation, namely, "the Desolation of the Being" (dieSeinsverlassenheit), he considers deeper at “the Essence of Technology” (das Wesen der Technik), the most important element of the Machine Age. Founding on this consideration he finds a way of overcoming, namely, “Art” (die Kunst). By Art can we begin to ask about “the Being” (das Sein) and to think about the change of "the Understanding of the Being" (das Seinsverständnis). What makes this change possible is "the Basic Mood" (die Grundstimmung). Therefore this Basic Mood must above all things be awoken. Drawing on Heidegger's philosophy, I would like to make several observations on the Machine Age and its overcoming. In this way I hope to make a contribution to the Machine Age, so that the modern world will not be regarded as a Machine, all beings will not be regarded as Parts and the modern human being will not be regarded as a special Part.

This research tried to make a contribution to the discussion around the conditions, under which the ontological shift of the philosophical hermeneutics can be done. It began with an analysis of Gadamer's well-known formula: " Being that can be understood is language. (Sein, das verstanden werden kann, ist Sprache.)". Scholars interpret it differently. By means of the grammatical analysis, I showed on the one hand an interpretation of the formula from the perspective of pan‐lingualism as absurd, because they regard Being and language as identical. On the other hand, an interpretation from the perspective of the linguistic ontology should be eliminated, according to which the being possesses a linguistic character, so that its unconcealment can complete itself without the effort ofunderstanding. The two interpretations come from a misunderstanding that they regard the subordinate clause of that formula as descriptive relative clause. There is still another interpretive problem, if we regard the subordinate clause as restrictive relative clause and thus interpret Gadamer's theory as linguistic idealism. However Gadamer indicates that such an interpretation remains on the level of German idealism, because it limits understanding to an intellectual grasping. Another reading of the subordinate clause as restrictive relative clause is appropriate, because it takes understanding as a practical ability (Können) into its consideration and at the same time emphasizes the non-identity between Being and language despite their ontological inseparableness. Gadamer finds out a linguistic theory, in order to support such kind of reading. He extends his principle of aesthetic non-differentiation to the range of language. By means of thislinguistic non-differentiation, the ontological shift of the hermeneutics can complete itself.

The present paper outlines the main points of Heidegger’s philosophical program starting from his early lectures of Freiburg. This program is founded in two fundamental questions. On the one hand, a thematic question: the phenomenon of life and its different forms of manifestation and apprehension. On the other hand, an eminently methodological question, namely the question of how it is possible to access in a correct manner to the primary sphere of life. This last issue conducts the young Heidegger to a first and deep questioning of Husserl’s reflexive phenomenology that ends up in his hermeneutic turn of phenomenology.

Based on the philosophic hermeneutics, this text wants to open horizons of meaning around the dialogue between social sciences and philosophy, from what I have called in this work hermeneutic subjectivity. In the first part, there is an approximation to Heidegger concept of dasein, as an antithesis of the modern subject. Then, based on memory, utopia, self-understanding and narration, it presents a theoretical contribution to understand how hermeneutic subjectivity isconstituted. Finally, it makes an invitation to a necessary dialogue between social sciences and philosophy.

The metaphysical-epistemological paradigm has ceased to be of actuality in contemporary culture. This does not mean that its falsity has been shown. Such an affirmation would imply that there is something like the truth, from which now, finally, the inanity of this paradigm can be claimed. The Rortian hermeneutics,with his pragmatic-ironic character, cannot justify this consideration. Taking into account Rorty’s criticism to ‘Platon-Kant canon’, and after analysing the Rortian ironic canon, and focusing on Rorty’s pan-relationism theory, I will discuss in this contribution whether there are or not some ontological suppositions in Rortianhermeneutics. I will situate in the middle of this debate the contingency and freedom categories with the background of Gadamer’s hermeneutical ontology. The projection of this theoretical debate on the political space of contemporary advanced democracies will show the practical-political importance of hermenutics.

1. This article chooses several LAOZI famous sayings, discusses the LAOZI philosophy the dialectical thought and its modern significance. And proposed that the philosophy should make the contribution for the world peace. 2. The atomic bomb and the violence, threaten humanity's life, is this century characteristic. The science is developed, the humanity has not obtained the perfect happiness, on the contrary is actually the threat which the world trend perishes. Take this fact as the example, has proven LAOZI “:为学日益,为道日损” dialectical thought. 3. LAOZI said: “民不畏死,奈何以死惧之”. Its meaning is, regarding the death, feared that with did not fear, is relative, may transform. Resolves the contradiction with the military force, died the threat people, if the people did not fear death, you did not have the means. Explained that person's will, it cannot use the military force to conquer. Relieves various countries' dispute, with the military force is impossible. 4. LAOZI said: Why the world weakest water, can it have the flood tremendous strength? Is because has an invariable will. Always flows unceasingly, achieves thebalanced position, or the condition is tranquil, only then stops. But the humanity has one kind of forever invariable will similarly, is requests the equality, request peace. Therefore people's will, is the invincible tremendous strength. This is an eternal truth.