Repository | Book | Chapter

"Dialogue" has become a fashionable term of in many circles of comparative studies. The twentieth century German philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer placed dialogue at the center of his philosophical hermeneutics. Proposing the accomplishment of a "fusion of horizons' between initially opposed parties, Gadamer outlined the structure of engagement between self and other. Situating the self in an irrevocable historical context, he argued that this self must encounter the other and through this encounter enrich its own position. Though ostensibly intended as a corrective to more openly colonial intentions and agendas, a close examination of Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics betrays lingering colonial interests. These interests become pronounced when compared with what I call the postcolonial hermeneutics of the twentieth century Indian philosopher Jarava Lal Mehta. What distinguishes philosophical from postcolonial hermeneutics is the condition of the self subsequent to its encounter with the other. Where for Gadamer the other is a moment of the self's enrichment and edification — those elements of the other that do not facilitate such conservative agendas being discarded — the other for Mehta is a moment of the self's disruption. Mehta emphasizes an encounter wherein both parties are not edified but rather ruptured. Such rupture highlights the incompletion of all subjects subject to the "dialogue." Where philosophical hermeneutics emphasize edifying supplementation, postcolonial hermeneutics emphasize rupture, dislocation, and incompletion.

DOI: 10.1007/978-90-481-2538-8_6

Full citation: