Miljan Popić
The paper discusses the similarities and differences in the interpretation of Platonic dialectic within the philosophical thought of Helmut Kuhn and Hans-Georg Gadamer. Both belong to a tradition that viewed Plato as a kind of corrective for the crisis of the modern world. Although they were long-time collaborators – primarily as the founders and editors of the influential journal Philosophische Rundschau (PhR) – we find that their approaches to Platonic dialectic ultimately yield different conceptions of being and truth. Kuhn views dialectic as a method for grasping the transcendent order of being, wherein dialectical insight serves as the ontological foundation for the ethical and political authority of the state. Conversely, Gadamer perceives dialectics through hermeneutics, defining it as an infinite process of dialogue in which truth is always mediated by language and historical situation, rather than fixed within a metaphysical system. The paper demonstrates how two crucial tendencies of the twentieth century are reflected within their thought: the need for a stable normative order and the awareness of the inevitable openness of all understanding.