Hermeneutics

Conceptual Overview and Discussion

The classical Greek word hermeneus means “interpreter” or “expounder.” Hermeneutics is about interpretation or even translation; it is about clarification—making the obscure less obscure. The hermeneutical tradition started in biblical studies and philology in order to decipher the authentic meanings of biblical texts. Since the 19th century it has been embraced by the humanities and more recently the social sciences, particularly in the interpretive sociological tradition in which the quest for causal explanation and prediction is replaced with the quest for understanding human actions (verstehen). What is of interest is how the text speaks through the person rather than finding an objective scientific reality behind the text.

The term text refers more broadly to all kinds of written documents. Texts are generally finished texts intended for communication outside the original situation. They have endured physically, been witnessed, and can be studied when the originators are no longer present. Examples include electronic mail, financial statements, agendas and meeting minutes, advertisements, official policy letters, articles, films, and transcribed interviews. Contemporary philosophers (e.g., Michel Foucault) extend the meaning of text to what is visual or action oriented—the text of the body itself.

Hermeneutic philosophers have set out to answer more than the question of what constitutes a text from which understanding (verstehen) can be sought. They have also asked: Through what process can it best be understood? What constitutes authentic textual interpretation?

Friedrich Schleiermacher, known as the father of modern hermeneutics, calls attention to the necessary art form of doing hermeneutics in that the reader of a text must be as much an artist as its author was. The anxiety to be understood (the text along with the author) and the anxiety to understand (the interpreter) are meaningfully negotiated when the hermeneutist is disciplined and artistically sound. For this negotiation to come about authentically, hermeneutists must arrive at their interpretation though attending to the psychological and grammatical dimensions of textual reading. The former pertains to the interplay between reader and text with the understanding that texts are the product of the author's historical location and social positioning. If this is not taken into account, misunderstanding between the text and interpreter can result. The latter dimension is concerned with careful examination of linguistic and syntactical structures of the textual language.

Wilhelm Dilthey adds that in addition to the author's mind-set, one must take into account his or her broader cultural milieu. Second, he names the text as not only more than a piece of writing, but a cultural artifact. Dilthey coined “the hermeneutic circle,” which refers to the principle that the “part” (e.g., the text or pieces of the text) can be understood only with reference to the “whole” (e.g., the whole text and/or the cultural context) and vice versa. The meaning resides in this circular [Page 436]understanding where the goal is to capture the spirit rather than the letter. The “part” and the “whole” are not exclusive but interpenetrate one another. The interpretation of meaning ends when the hermeneutist reaches good “Gestalt” or an inner unity free of logical contradictions.

...