通过重新想象提交人的意图来恢复文学文本的完整或完全含义的梦想结束了汉斯Georg伽达默尔（1900-2002;而不是这个解释学or interpretive circle (circling back from the text to the author, and back again, closing off, or finishing the job of interpretation), Gadamer’s hermeneutical approach involves understanding the historical situations of text and reader, and the ways in which these interact to create a temporarily shared meaning. The mystical divination of a text is thus replaced by Heidegger’s notion that the hermeneutical circle is actually ‘part of the structure of understanding itself ’. Gadamer’s insights into a hermeneutics for the twentieth century thus draw not only from some of the great phenomenological thinkers such as Husserl and Heidegger, but also partake of the paradigm shift of the observer being part of the equation when it comes to measuring or assessing the observed, a shift that many thinkers argue paved the way for postmodernism. Gadamer was born in Marburg, Germany and was educated at Breslau University where he studied art and music history, German literature and neo-Kantian philosophy, receiving his doctorate for a thesis on Plato in 1922. An early publication called ‘On the Idea of System in Philosophy’ (1924) reveals the influence of Martin Heidegger, with whom Gadamer had studied the previous year; Gadamer described the experience of first reading Heidegger as affecting him ‘like an electric shock’ and his lectures as revealing ‘the energy of a revolutionary thinker’. Heidegger continued to impact upon Gadamer throughout his early years as an academic, and this can be seen in his first book, a phenomenological reading of Plato published in 1931. By that time Gadamer had passed his higher doctorate, called a habilitation (1928) and was lecturing at Marburg. During the early Nazi period, through which he lived, Gadamer turned his attentions to the study of mathematics, and published a book on Johann Gottfried Herder (1942). In 1937 Gadamer was promoted to the position of professor, followed by a professorship in classical philology at Halle, and then a professorship at Leipzig (1938–1947), where he became the rector. Gadamer returned to scholarship with a move to Frankfurt (1947–1949), being awarded in 1949 Karl Jaspers’ Chair at Heidelberg (1949–1968). It was during this period that Gadamer produced his major work Wahrheit und Methode: Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik (1960) translated in 1975 (without the important subtitle) as真理和方法。

读者如何新的伽达默尔将接近超过五百页的严重和哲学分析他的真理和方法吗?伽达默尔(和诠释学)的主要评论员之一，理查德·e·帕尔默(Richard E. Palmer)认为，来自真理和方法的20个关键术语对于理解伽达默尔方法的相关性至关重要。采取五项——理解、播放、事件、经验和对话——至少可以了解的动态过程,伽达默尔主张在释放读者从传统封闭的解释学循环总或完全的真理是重建和恢复。对于伽达默尔来说，解释从根本上是对话的:因此，正在进行的对话的隐喻是极其重要的。这种对话或对话也意味着对文本的“差异性”或他性的开放。解释器是如何实现这一点的?不是通过中立性或抹掉自己的身份，而是通过突出人们带给文本的东西，那些海德格尔在《存在与时间》第45节中称之为“预先拥有”、“预先预见”和“解释的预先概念”的态度。换句话说，对读者带给文本的“偏见”的承认，也是一种清理空间来认识文本的他者性的方式，或者，如伽达默尔所说，允许文本“断言自己的真理”。然而，读者并不是一个完全自主的主体:她处在历史的位置上，这意味着她的身份在一定程度上是由传统形成的，她通过参与和理解，继续为传统的产生作出贡献。伽达默尔因此认为理解不是什么奇迹，而是在文本和读者、传统和解释之间“分享共同的意义”。 Where traditional hermeneutics regarded the interpretive act as a recovery of a text’s full meaning (an act of closure), Gadamer argues that the correct stance is one of a disrupted ‘fore-conception of completeness’ where we assume that a text is ‘full’ or complete in its meaning, but reality (the encounter with the object) reveals that this assumption is incorrect and the text is unintelligible. Gadamer distinguishes here between the attempt to understand the content of a text versus the attempt to recover another’s meaning embodied via the writing of a text. While there is a bond between the interpreter and the text as transmitted by tradition, it is not necessarily a mystical union between the two; rather, Gadamer suggests that hermeneutics is affected by the polarity of ‘familiarity and strangeness’. It is the play between the two, the crossing ‘between’ belonging and alienation, that is the space of hermeneutics. Temporal distance here is not a problem to be overcome, but a constitutive factor. In other words, the traditional hermeneutic approach whereby the past authorial position needed to be reproduced, crossing the vast gulf of time (transposing ‘ourselves into the spirit of the age’), is replaced by a notion of interpretive production, achieved through temporal distance, and the falling away of the cares and concerns of ‘the present’ in relation to the object in question. Poststructuralist theorists are deeply suspicious of this move, because it suggests that there is an underlying authenticity or universality that such hermeneutic inquiry uncovers, for example, that Shakespeare’s plays are expressive of aesthetic genius regardless of the age in which they are read or performed. In fact, the hermeneutics being described here would have to argue that it is only across time that such a recognition could occur, not in the sense of ‘historicism’ (the object is now isolated and stable because of the passing of time) but in the sense of ‘historicity’ (the foregrounding of the reader’s situated prejudices). The reader thus has an awareness of her hermeneutical situation, a limited standpoint which has a finite horizon, yet, and this is essential, Gadamer argues that human beings are never limited by a single horizon: horizons shift and change as life itself moves on. Further, understanding is the fusion of historical and present horizons, with the understanding that this is not a permanent arrival at truth. Again, we can see how this notion of understanding prefigures postmodernism, because here ‘the knower’s present situation loses its status as a privileged position and becomes instead a fluid and relative moment’.

随着帕尔默的笔记，自真相和方法的出版以来，伽达默尔生命中的一切都是一系列的阐明，解释，进一步发展，甚至发生了变化，在这方面。1960年出版于1960年代，伽达默尔在接下来的四十年中花了探索他对国际观众的影响。为什么当高理论接管学院时为什么有伽达默尔这样的观众，即使是他对更专业的现象理论诠释学的追随者的重要性？线索在于
真理和方法的第三部分，标题为“语言引导的诠释学的本体论”。随着学院通过语言转弯，伽达默尔出色的哲学批判和解释制作类似的举措：

只有在伽达默尔的主要工作的第三部分，它明确表示所有特权职位的解构是一个大胆无条件的语言。语言不是“工具”，即特权意识可能会用来“表达”它的立场。在我们说话之前，这是一种讲述我们的现象，这意味着我们永远不会走在它之外并立场
反对它。

值得关注的地平线如何后结构主义这里融合了伽达默尔的诠释学。

源：Richard J. Lane，Retledge Publication的五十个重点文学理论家。

类别：文学批评,俄罗斯乌克兰比分直播

标签:汉斯Georg伽达默尔,诠释学,真理和方法