Talk:Paul Ricœur

message: Paul Ricoeur also made significant contributions to theology. This article, while giving a good basic introduction to his life and his work as it relates to philosophy does not at all touch on his theological contributions.  Unfortunately, I am not qualified to add information regarding his theological contributions to the article.Bob em 09:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To displace a quote from Ricoeur's student, Derrida, when we talk about philosophy, "we are already talking about theology". Ricoeur's influence on theology isn't really separable from his philosophy. In fact, Ricoeur only infrequently explicitly writes on theology as such — despite being a life-long Christian and even holding a chair in theology. Even then, by and large, his impact on theology is really not to be found in his explicitly theological writings, but in his concepts of hermeneutics and ethics. That said, even here we encounter an implicit theology (one can recall that modern philosophical hermeneutics traces itself back to Schleiermacher, and, of course, Ricoeur's development of hermeneutics always gives a nod towards his interpretation of the bible). However, it is interesting to note that most of what theologians have garnered from Ricoeur is not so much his ideas about the meanings of particular passages, but the philosophical notions behind them — that is the hermeneutic arc, the interplay of symbols, the surplus of meaning, etc. Particularly telling in this regard is one commentator in a paper I read recently who called Ricoeur's biblical exegeis a turn in his later life (or something like that), which rather ignores some of his earlier writings on the subject. That said, it is precisely these underlying concepts which are sorely lacking in development in this article (or, indeed, to the best of my knowledge, on Wikipedia as a whole). If I get a chance, I will try to add something, but for now, I've got a bit too much on my plate. Ig0774 10:52, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: fr.wikipedia.org quote:
"
Après la guerre, il enseigne trois ans au Collège Cévenol du Chambon où il achève sa thèse sur la volonté.
'
What is missing is why the minister sent him there.  That is now well-known in France (and remember, he had already been teaching philosophy when he began pamphleteering for collaboration in the camp - this was not some young student.)
The book "Paul Ricoeur: His Life and His Work" By Charles E. Reagan has pg 16 giving an account of Ricoeur which has no mention - a lack in two major encyclo's - of where he was first assigned to teach after the war - and of course no mention of his written advocacy of collaboration with the Nazis during his time in camp.
Reagan glosses over Ricoeur going to Munich in the summer of 1939.  He is presented as utterly naive - and harmlessly so.
The place I now begin is with the likely first lies concerning when he and Dufrenne worked on the Jaspers book.  When it came out in 1947, Jaspers was also releasing his monumental "Von Der Wahrheit".  In their book they lament his treatment of truth in "Philosphie" and after - but although their book ends with a polemical opposition of Jaspers to Heidegger, after 1948 neither ever return to Jaspers (Ricoeur wrote those last chapters - Reagan is wrong - they deserve to be translated and read.)
By 1953, the Dufrenne dissertation has adopted Heidegger and has no sign of Jaspers.
As a student I moved very quickly from Jaspers over to Ricoeur; I now find this embarrassing - especially in going back to the Ricoeur essay on Jaspers in the Schlipp volume.
I recall no treatment of Jaspers in "Histoire et Verité".
I now consider the section on Jaspers versus Heidegger in that 1947 volume to be despicable - and knowing what we now know aboout Jean Beaufret and the cult of Heidegger, the Ricoeur career takes on a whole new aspect.
For a philosopher who dances around Heidegger in a similar manner, there is Canada's great Charles Taylor (in many ways the Catholic version of Protestant Ricoeur.)
To defeat if not remove bias, I keep reading Alasdair MacIntyre along with Michael Martin.  
When Ricoeur returned to Paris, he says the first thing he did was visit Marcel.  But Mounier was still living (the article at fr.wikipedia.com on Emmanuel Mounier presents the clearest possible contrast to Ricoeur, who was occupied with making a career as a Protestant philosopher (how Heidegger would have mocked that!) 
If you have doubts about the career consideration, I suggest reading Dallas Willard's embarrassing but candid account of how he went from translator to Baptist philosopher at a "secular" university (he did not even have to apply for the job, he claims.)
It was not until 1987 that France began to look at itself somewhat more closely - think of the philosophers chased from Germany after '33 who, given Mounier's 1948 plan, could have had jobs in France (but then read what Raymond Aron recounts in his bio).
I think that once Jaspers withdrew to Basel, the theists knew they were going to be more comfortable with Heidegger: Jaspers was given to plain speech in disagreements, no matter how obscure much to the work he wrote as a philosopher.  For a taste of that, read his reply to Ricoeur in that Schlipp volume "Jaspers" in the Living Philosophers series.
Dufrenne's career went as far as Nantes, he is largely forgotten.  His major work is sadly bloated and flawed.  Ricoeur just kept blossoming.  Did someone mention Chuck Taylor? (now also at Chicago and a voluminous Harvard U Press author and also generally ignored by philosophers as was Ricoeur and for much the same good reasons.)
At  http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Beaufret  the French article comments repeatedly on the politics of careers in French universities.  For quite a different view, read Ricoeur contribution to the public meetings in 1967 where he is at pains to urge protecting their positions.
G. Robert Shiplett 06:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ricoeur Sanitized (no stains to recall or recognize) 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Paul Ricœur. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130523172410/http://www.inamori-f.or.jp/laureates/k16_c_paul/prf_e.html to http://www.inamori-f.or.jp/laureates/k16_c_paul/prf_e.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090723001927/http://www.zetabooks.com/zeta-series-in-translation-studies.html to http://www.zetabooks.com/zeta-series-in-translation-studies.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160206142102/http://ruthellenjosselson.com/articles/josselson.ni.14-1.1e.pdf to http://ruthellenjosselson.com/articles/josselson.ni.14-1.1e.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060613201339/http://www.theology.ie/thinkers/ricoeur.htm to http://www.theology.ie/thinkers/ricoeur.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:07, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Husserl - an Analysis of His Phenomenology by Paul Ricoeur, hb 1967, 238 pp, Northwestern University Press, translated by Edward G. Ballard and Lester E. Embree.
It is a composite of nine Ricoeur essays.
1. Introduction: Husserl (1859-1938)
2. An Introduction to Husserl's Ideas I
3. Husserl's Ideas I: Analyses and Problems
4. A Study Husserl's Cartesian Meditations, I-IV 
5. Husserl's Fifth Cartesian Meditation
6. Husserl and the Sense of History
7. Kant and Husserl
8. Existential Phenomenology
9. Methods and Tasks of a Phenomenology of the Will
from D. Needham 2601:280:CA80:8970:5988:151C:A7E5:864B (talk) 03:19, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ricoeur book on Husserl 1967