Document Type : Review article

Authors

• Atabak Asadi
• Masoomeh Ghayoori

دانشگاه گیلان

Abstract

Both Hirshch and Gadamer criticize methods in textual interpretation. Hershch fundamentally rejects method as an external imposition on the text and instead introduces the principle that it operates on the author's intention and verifies the interpretation. He emphasizes that a valid interpretation must be in accordance with the author's intention. Gadamer also criticizes the concept of "method" and emphasizes the importance of prejudices and traditions in understanding. By emphasizing the participatory nature of understanding, he highlights the reader's contribution to the interpretive process and introduces the concept of a game, in which priority is given to the reactions of the players rather than the rules. Hershch pays attention to literal meaning and believes that a valid interpretation must correspond to the type of text and the author's intention. Gadamer also considers prejudices as a factor that, in addition to creating understanding, opens up new possibilities for interpretation. This article examines the differences and similarities between the views of these two philosophers on the method and criteria of interpretation and attempts to examine the prejudices that influence a particular interpretation by combining a specific reading of Gadamer and Foucault's archaeology.

Keywords

• Philosophical hermeneutic
• application
• anti-methode
• hirsch
• gadamer