Schleiermacher’s Hermeneutics and the Myth of the Given

C. West
{"title":"Schleiermacher’s Hermeneutics and the Myth of the Given","authors":"C. West","doi":"10.7916/D85T3W7W","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Friedrich Schleiermacher is the father of modern philosophical hermeneutics. His Copernican Revolution in hermeneutics shifted the focus from understanding texts to the process of understanding itself. Instead of providing general rules for biblical and philological exegesis, he asked a more fundamental question: How is understanding pos­ sible? By separating the applicatory function of interpretation from the act of understanding, Schleiermacher created the new, independent domain of theoretical inquiry into the necessary and sufficient conditions for the possibility of understanding. In this essay, I shall argue that Schleiermacher's valiant attempt to provide an acceptable hermeneutical theory to overcome the distance between speakers and listeners, readers and authors is unsuccessful owing to his acceptance of The Myth of the Given. The Myth of the Given is a philosophical doctrine held most notably by Cartesian and Kantian thinkers. Its rests upon a particular view of langauge and the relation of language to con­ sciousness and awareness. I will try to show that The Myth of the Given is untenable by sketching three contemporary attacks on it-those of Martin Heidegger, Jacques Derrida and Ludwig Wittgenstein. Lastly, I will suggest implications these attacks have for the fu­ ture of philosophy and theology. A. The Myth of the Given in Modern Philosophy","PeriodicalId":83394,"journal":{"name":"Union Seminary quarterly review","volume":"34 1","pages":"71-84"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1979-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Union Seminary quarterly review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7916/D85T3W7W","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Friedrich Schleiermacher is the father of modern philosophical hermeneutics. His Copernican Revolution in hermeneutics shifted the focus from understanding texts to the process of understanding itself. Instead of providing general rules for biblical and philological exegesis, he asked a more fundamental question: How is understanding pos­ sible? By separating the applicatory function of interpretation from the act of understanding, Schleiermacher created the new, independent domain of theoretical inquiry into the necessary and sufficient conditions for the possibility of understanding. In this essay, I shall argue that Schleiermacher's valiant attempt to provide an acceptable hermeneutical theory to overcome the distance between speakers and listeners, readers and authors is unsuccessful owing to his acceptance of The Myth of the Given. The Myth of the Given is a philosophical doctrine held most notably by Cartesian and Kantian thinkers. Its rests upon a particular view of langauge and the relation of language to con­ sciousness and awareness. I will try to show that The Myth of the Given is untenable by sketching three contemporary attacks on it-those of Martin Heidegger, Jacques Derrida and Ludwig Wittgenstein. Lastly, I will suggest implications these attacks have for the fu­ ture of philosophy and theology. A. The Myth of the Given in Modern Philosophy
施莱尔马赫的解释学和给予的神话
弗里德里希·施莱尔马赫是现代哲学解释学之父。他在解释学上的哥白尼式革命将焦点从理解文本转移到理解过程本身。他没有提供圣经和语言学释经的一般规则,而是提出了一个更基本的问题:理解如何可能?通过将解释的应用功能从理解行为中分离出来,施莱尔马赫创造了一个新的、独立的理论研究领域,对理解可能性的必要条件和充分条件进行研究。在这篇文章中,我将论证施莱尔马赫勇敢地尝试提供一种可接受的解释学理论来克服说话者与听众、读者和作者之间的距离,由于他接受了“给定的神话”,他是不成功的。“给定的神话”是笛卡尔和康德学派思想家最著名的哲学学说。它建立在一种特殊的语言观以及语言与意识和意识的关系之上。我将通过描绘当代对“既定神话”的三种攻击——马丁·海德格尔、雅克·德里达和路德维希·维特根斯坦——来证明“既定神话”是站不住脚的。最后,我将提出这些攻击对哲学和神学未来的影响。A.现代哲学中给予的神话
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信