Abstract
The aim of this article is to situate the problem of the conflict of interpretations in Paul Ricœur by placing it in the context of Ricœur’s anthropological reflections on the questions of fallibility and evil. The article invokes the distinction between fallibility and evil and analyses the symbolic language of evil as a reason for the hermeneutic turn of Ricœur’s thought. The implications of this topic for the philosophical analyses of language and consciousness are then put in relief. The article explains the inner workings of the logic of the conflict of interpretations, showing its perspectival trait, and claims that this notion remains pertinent given that its method can today be applied to conflicts of interpretations other than those Ricœur dealt with.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
