Hermeneutic method in psychology. Hermeneutic method in humanitarian knowledge Hermeneutics in psychology
Hermeneutics is the theory of text interpretation and the science of understanding meaning, which has received widespread
distribution in modern Western literary criticism. Based on the principles of hermeneutics
The construction of a new theory of literature is underway.
Traditionally associated with hermeneutics is the idea of a universal method in the field of humanities.
nitarian sciences. As a method of interpreting historical facts based on philological data
hermeneutics was considered a universal principle for interpreting literary monuments.
The function of interpretation is to teach how works of art should be understood.
va according to its absolute artistic value.
The instrument of interpretation is considered to be the consciousness of the person perceiving the work, i.e.
interpretation is considered as a derivative of the perception of a literary work.
The founder of modern hermeneutics is considered to be the German scientist Friedrich Schleyer.
The peculiarity of Schleiermacher’s method is the inclusion in the interpretation of a work not only of logical
"internal logic".
Another German scientist W. Dilthey wrote a book “The Origin of Hermeneutics”, in which
called for comprehending the “inner reality” of the artist’s spiritual life.
Literary hermeneutics substantiates the conclusion that a work of art cannot be understood
in itself as a single product of creative activity. A work of art is a ma-
terial objectification of the tradition of cultural experience, so its interpretation makes sense
only when it marks an exit into the continuity of cultural tradition (Gadamer). Artist-
a work of art is a factor of culture, and when interpreting it it is necessary to reconstruct
to restore his place in the spiritual history of mankind.
Hermeneutic analysis is the reconstruction of a text. The interpretation of the work must be
If in the process of deconstructing a text completely arbitrary and independent
his interpretation, then in the process of reconstruction of the text, which Hirsch advocates, all created
Hirsch “center”, “original core”, which organizes a unified system of meaning of the product
tions in the paradigm of its numerous interpretations. "The Principle of Authorial Authority" Hirsch
introduces as a basis by which one can judge the reliability or unreliability of an interpretation.
The main thing in hermeneutic interpretation is not only the historical reconstruction of literary
th text and consistent averaging of our historical context with the context of the historical
of the work, but also to expand the reader’s awareness, help in his deeper understanding
self-consciousness.
Hermeneutics is related to receptive aesthetics in that the latter complements the principles outlined above.
principles by socio-historical ideas.
Basic concepts of hermeneutics
The hermeneutic circle is the paradox of the irreducibility of understanding and interpretation of a text to logic
consistent algorithm. Many scholars see the traditional initial difficulty of hermen-
tics precisely in Gadaner’s concept, in the understanding of the so-called “circle of part and whole.” Most
This phenomenon is succinctly captured in the formulation
V. Dilthey that any interpretation is characterized by such a forward movement that goes
from the perception of definite and indefinite parts to an attempt to capture the meaning of the whole, alternating
with an attempt, based on the meaning of this whole, to more accurately define the parts themselves. Failure of this
The method is revealed when the individual parts do not become clearer.
Double code is a concept of hermeneutics that should explain the specific nature of artistic
nal modernist texts.
The French scientist R. Barthes - as a theorist of poststructuralism and a predecessor of postmodernism
nism, in any work of art he identified five codes (cultural, hermeneutic,
symbolic, semimic, and pro-airetic or narrative). The word "code" should not be here
be accepted in the strict, scientific meaning of the term. We simply call associative codes
la, supertextual organization of meanings that impose ideas about a certain
structure; code, as we understand it, belongs primarily to the cultural sphere; codes are
certain types of things already seen, already read, already done; the code is a specific form of this
"already". Any narrative, according to Barthes, exists in the interweaving of various codes, their constant
“interruption” with each other, which gives rise to “reader impatience” in an attempt to comprehend the eternally
shifting nuances of meaning.
Dutch scientist D. Fokkema notes that the code of postmodernism is just one
of the many codes that govern the production of text. Other codes that writers are guided by
tel, is first of all a linguistic code (natural language - English, French and
giving a high degree of coherence, a genre code that activates a certain
certain expectations associated with the chosen genre, and the writer’s idiolect, which, to the extent
which it is distinguished on the basis of recurrent features can also be considered a special code. F.
Jameson came up with the concept of "dual coding". According to him, all the codes highlighted
Barth, on the one hand, and the conscious installation of postmodern stylistics on the ironic
comparison of various literary styles, genre forms and artistic movements - with others
goy, act in the artistic practice of postmodernism as two large code supersystems.
Interpretation (interpretation) is the main term of hermeneutics, based on the idea of Kant,
looking at consciousness as an object of the world. The world is understood as prior to all subjective
but objective relations. True art lies in learning to see the world again.
For hermeneutics, not only the phenomenon of understanding is important, but also the problem of correct presentation
attesting witness The fundamental connection between language and the world means ontological essence and orientation
understanding and interpretation. Since it is only in language that a person’s personal experiences are found most
a more complete, comprehensive and objectively comprehended expression, interpretation develops according to
advantage around the interpretation of “written monuments of the human spirit” (Dilthey). Inter-
The interpretation of these monuments eventually became the starting point for philology.
For hermeneutics, interpretation is a certain type of knowledge that strives
strives for a scientific basis for what it represents. According to F. Schleiermacher, the art of inter-
presentation is to “bring oneself closer to the author from the objective and subjective side
text." From the objective side, this is carried out through understanding the author’s language, from the subjective side -
through knowledge of the facts of his inner and outer life.
Only through the interpretation of texts can one reveal the author’s vocabulary, his character, the circumstances
of his life. The vocabulary and historical and cultural layer of the author’s era constitute a single
a whole on the basis of which texts are to be understood as elements, and the whole is understood from them.
Thus, the art of interpretation is directly related to the concept of hermeneutic
circle, which asserts that everything particular can be understood only from the general, of which it is a part
itself is, and vice versa. Schleiermacher in his “Hermeneutics” derives a general methodological
rule for the interpreter: “a) you should start with a general idea of the whole;
b) move forward simultaneously in two directions - grammatical and psychological; V)
give, give the same result; d) if there is a discrepancy, you should go back and find the error."
So, in the variety of modern methods of literature research, two main ones can be distinguished:
new directions.
The first direction - scientistic - consists of methods that are related, first of all,
go, their desire to build a methodology of strictly scientific research, to give their concepts
form of exact science and exclude ideological, social and ideological
gical problems (formal, structuralist, intertextual, deconstructive method-
The second direction is anthropocentric. Supporters of the second direction, for example,
tive, come from the fixation of the moral, psychological states of the creator and the perceiver
personality. They believe that a work of art cannot only be experienced, felt
but, intuitively known (hermeneutic, phenomenological, mythopoetic, receptive-
aesthetic analysis). Traditionally, the idea of a universal method in the field of humanitarian
scientific sciences were associated with hermeneutics. It is hermeneutics as a method of interpreting historical
facts based on philological data, was considered a universal principle for the interpretation of literature
literary monuments. The function of hermeneutic interpretation is to teach
how a work of art should be understood according to its absolute artistic value.
The instrument of interpretation is considered to be the consciousness of the person perceiving the work, i.e. in-
interpretation is considered as a derivative of the perception of a literary work. Traditionally
ational hermeneutics substantiated the conclusion that a work of art cannot be understood by itself
in itself, as a single product of creative activity. A work of art is the mother
nal objectification of the tradition of cultural experience, therefore its interpretation makes sense only
when it plans to enter the continuity of cultural tradition. Hermeneutic "understanding"
nie" is aimed at reconstructing the meaning, deciphering the historical text in order to understand
of the continuity of the spiritual and cultural experience of humanity, to introduce a new generation
and the new era to the past, to tradition.
In modern science, all of the listed methods of analyzing a work of art are used.
conducting in various combinations, which are determined by the characteristics of the author's research
Hermeneutic method
♦ (ENG hermeneutical method)
a conscious approach to interpreting texts according to certain procedures.
Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms. - M.: "Republic". McKim Donald K.. 2004 .
See what the “Hermeneutic method” is in other dictionaries:
HERMENEUTIC CIRCLE- a metaphor that describes the productive movement of the hermeneutic’s thought within the framework of hermeneutic reconstruction techniques. The thematization of G.K.’ was carried out by Schleiermacher, who relied on the achievements of the previous philological hermeneutics of F. Ast. The goal... ...
hermeneutic circle- THE HERMENEUTIC CIRCLE or circular structure of understanding was known in ancient rhetoric and patristics (Augustine: to understand the Holy Scripture, you must believe in it, and to believe, you must understand it). In hermeneutics, genetic theory is a process... ...
HERMENEUTIC CIRCLE- a metaphor that describes the productive movement of the hermeneutic’s thought within the framework of hermeneutic reconstruction techniques. Thematization by G.K. was carried out by Schleiermacher, who relied on the achievements of the previous philological hermeneutics of F. Ast. The goal... ... History of Philosophy: Encyclopedia
hermeneutic- see hermeneutics; oh, oh. Hermeneutical method. Research techniques... Dictionary of many expressions
TRUTH AND METHOD. MAIN FEATURES OF PHILOSOPHICAL HERMENEUTICS- 'THE TRUTH AND METHOD. The main features of philosophical hermeneutics’ work by Gadamer (1960), which was at the center of heated discussions for several decades and influenced the formation of modern German literary criticism, psychoanalysis... History of Philosophy: Encyclopedia
TRUTH AND METHOD. Main features of philosophical hermeneutics- a work by Gadamer (1960), which was at the center of heated discussions for several decades and influenced the formation of modern German literary criticism, psychoanalysis and neo-Marxism, as well as theorizing in the field... ... History of Philosophy: Encyclopedia
Truth and Method- “THE TRUTH AND METHOD” is a fundamental philosophical study by Hans Georg Gadamer (ategN.U. Wahrheit und Methode. Tubingen, 1960; Russian translation: Truth and Method: Fundamentals of Philosophical Hermeneutics. M., 1988). The main idea of the book is to present... ... Encyclopedia of Epistemology and Philosophy of Science
Hermeneutic method... Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms
BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS- a branch of church biblical studies that studies the principles and methods of interpreting the text of the Holy Scriptures. The Scriptures of the OT and NT and the historical process of the formation of its theological foundations. G. b. sometimes perceived as the methodological basis of exegesis. Greek word ἡ… … Orthodox Encyclopedia
legal hermeneutics- LEGAL HERMENEUTICS is the science of understanding and explaining the meaning laid down by the legislator in the text of a normative legal act. The task of the legal system is to methodologically ensure the transition from understanding the meaning of the rule of law to explaining its essence. Such… … Encyclopedia of Epistemology and Philosophy of Science
The new concept of hermeneutics was put forward by the German philosopher and art theorist Wilhelm Dilthey (1833-1911), who considered hermeneutics as a methodological basis for the humanities, which he classified as the sciences of the human spirit. (Geistenwissenschqft). They all deal with understanding human thought, art, culture and history. Unlike natural science, V. Dilthey pointed out, the content of the humanities, including history, is not facts of nature, but objectified expressions of the human spirit, thoughts and feelings of people, their goals and motives. Accordingly, if for explanations natural phenomena, causal laws are used, then for understanding actions and actions of people must first be interpreted, or interpreted, from the point of view of goals, interests and motives. Humanitarian understanding differs significantly from natural scientific explanation, because it is always associated with revealing the meaning of human activity in various forms of its manifestation.
Although V. Dilthey did not belong to the neo-Kantians, he put forward a program in the field of historical knowledge similar to the one that I. Kant tried to implement in "Critique of Pure Reason" for the philosophical justification of the natural sciences of his time. The main efforts of V. Dilthey were aimed at "critique of historical reason" in general, they coincided with the criticism of positivism in history, which was made by the neo-Kantians. As we have already noted, the anti-positivist criticism of the neo-Kantian philosophers W. Windelband and G. Rickert in the last quarter of the 19th century was supported by German historians and sociologists I. Droysen, G. Simmel and others. All of them, as we already know, opposed the transfer of techniques , models and methods of research in natural sciences into historical and social sciences, since this leads to ignoring their specific features.
V. Dilthey also joined this anti-positivist trend, but he did not limit himself to simple denial and criticism of the positivist concept, but set out to constructively develop a positive program in the field of the humanities. Why, as the main means, he chose the hermeneutic method, which from an essentially philological theory becomes the methodology of sciences that study the spiritual activity of man.
In the process of working on the book “The Life of Schleiermacher,” W. Dilthey thoroughly studied and mastered the methods of textual and historical interpretation of his predecessor, but gave them a more general methodological and philosophical character. He believed that neither natural scientific methods, nor metaphysical speculation, nor introspective psychological techniques could help to understand the spiritual life of a person, and especially of society. V. Dilthey emphasized that the inner spiritual human life, its formation and development, is a complex process in which thought, feeling, and will are connected into a single whole. Therefore, the humanities cannot study the spiritual activity of people with the help of concepts alien to them, such as causality, force, space, etc. Not without reason, V. Dilthey notes that in the veins of the knowing subject, constructed by D. Locke, D. Hume and I. Kant, there is not a drop of genuine blood. These thinkers viewed cognition as separate not only from feelings and will, but also from the historical context of inner human life.
As a supporter of the “philosophy of life,” V. Dilthey believed that the categories of the humanities should be derived from the living experience of people; they should be based on facts and phenomena that are meaningful only when they relate to the inner world of a person. This is how understanding another person is possible, and it is achieved as a result of spiritual reincarnation. Following F. Schleiermacher, he viewed such a process as a reconstruction and rethinking of the spiritual world of other people, which can only be penetrated through the correct interpretation of the expressions of inner life, which finds its objectification in the external world in works of material and spiritual culture. Therefore, understanding plays a decisive role in humanitarian research, since it is it that unites the internal and external into a single whole, considering the latter as a specific expression of a person’s internal experience, his goals, intentions and motivations. Only through understanding can comprehension of the unique and inimitable phenomena of human life and history be achieved. In contrast, when studying natural phenomena, the individual is considered as a means of achieving knowledge about the general, i.e. class of identical objects and phenomena; those. natural science is limited only to the explanation of phenomena, which comes down to subsuming phenomena under some general schemes or laws, while understanding makes it possible to comprehend the special and unique in social life, and this is essential for comprehending spiritual life, for example, art, where we value in particular, for their own sake, and we pay more attention to the individual characteristics of works of art than to their similarity and commonality with other works. A similar approach should be applied in the study of history, where we are interested in individual and unique events of the past, and not in abstract schemes of the general historical process. Such a sharp contrast between understanding and explanation found its vivid embodiment in Dilthey’s well-known aphorism: “we explain nature, but we must understand the living soul of man.”
However, historical understanding does not come down to empathy, or psychological penetration, of the researcher into the inner world of participants in past events. As we showed in the second chapter, such adaptation into the spiritual world of even an individual, and even more so an outstanding individual, is extremely difficult to realize. As for the motives of action and intentions of participants in broad social movements, they can be very different, and therefore it can be very difficult to find the resultant of their general behavior. The main difficulty here is that V. Dilthey, like other anti-positivists, excessively exaggerates the individuality and uniqueness of historical events and, thereby, opposes generalizations and laws in historical science. However, the hermeneutic method of inquiry that he advocated for the study of history deserves special attention.
The need to turn to methods of interpretation and understanding of hermeneutics is explained by the fact that the historian-researcher works, first of all, with various kinds of texts. For their analysis and interpretation in classical hermeneutics, many general and special techniques and methods have been developed for revealing the meaning of these texts, and, consequently, their interpretation and understanding,
Specific features in the interpretation of texts not only in the humanities and natural sciences, but also in historical and legal documents undoubtedly exist. However, interpretations generally follow a general pattern, which in natural science is sometimes called the hypothetico-deductive method. Such a scheme should best be seen as the derivation of conclusions, or consequences, from hypotheses that arise in the form of peculiar questions in the interpretation of texts. When a natural scientist conducts an experiment, he, in essence, asks a certain question to nature. The results of the experiment - the facts represent the answers that nature gives. To understand these facts, the scientist must interpret them, or interpret them, for which they first need to be comprehended, i.e. to give them a specific, specific meaning or meaning. Despite the fact that V. Dilthey, as we know, contrasted natural scientific knowledge with social and humanitarian knowledge, nevertheless, he recognized that any interpretation begins precisely with the formulation of a hypothesis of a general, preliminary nature, which, in the course of its development and interpretation, is gradually concretized and TBC. If, when setting up an experiment, a question is asked of nature, then in the course of historical research this question is asked of historical evidence or the text of a surviving document. Thus, in both cases, certain questions are asked, preliminary answers are formulated in the form of hypotheses and assumptions, which are then tested with the help of existing facts (in natural science) or evidence and other sources (in history). Such facts and historical evidence become meaningful because they are included in a certain system of theoretical ideas, which in turn are the result of complex, creative, cognitive activity. From a purely logical point of view, the process of interpreting and understanding historical evidence from sources and authorities can be considered as a hypothetico-deductive method of reasoning, which is really concerned with generating hypotheses and testing them. Currently, many scientists believe that this method can be used in various branches of social and humanitarian knowledge. Some philosophers, such as the Swede D. Folesdal, even argue that the hermeneutic method itself essentially comes down to the application of the hypothetico-deductive method to the specific material with which the social sciences and humanities deal. However, the hypothetico-deductive method serves here rather as a general scheme, a kind of strategy for scientific search and its rational justification, and the main role in this search is played by the stage of generating and inventing hypotheses, associated with intuition and imagination, mental models and other creative and heuristic research methods.
The difference between natural scientific and historical interpretation lies first and foremost in the nature of the object of interpretation.
Interpretation and the understanding based on it must take into account, on the one hand, all objective data related to historical evidence or the text of a document; on the other hand, no researcher, even in the natural sciences, and especially in the historical and human sciences, can approach to its object without any ideas, theoretical concepts, value orientations, i.e. without what is associated with the spiritual activity of the cognizing subject. It is this aspect of the matter that V. Dilthey and his followers pay attention to. We have already noted that interpretation in their view is considered, first of all, as empathy, or feeling, getting used to the spiritual world of the individual. But with such a psychological and subjective approach, the study of the activities of outstanding historical figures comes down to a hypothetical analysis of their intentions, goals and thoughts, rather than actions and actions. And there is certainly no need to talk about interpretations of the activities of large groups and groups of people.
Most often, historians deal with texts that are often poorly preserved and poorly understood; however, these texts are actually the only evidence about the past, hence some scholars claim that everything that can be said about past events is contained in historical evidence. Similar statements are made by translators, literary and art historians, critics and other specialists who deal with the problems of interpreting texts that differ in specific content. But the text itself, be it historical evidence or a work of art, in the strict sense of the word represents only a sign system that acquires meaning as a result of appropriate interpretation; How the text is interpreted determines its comprehension or understanding. Whatever form the interpretation takes, it is closely connected with the activity of the cognizing subject, who gives a certain meaning to the text. With this approach, understanding the text is not limited to how the author understood it. As M.M. rightly emphasized. Bakhtin, “understanding can and should be better. Understanding complements the text: it is active and creative in nature.” However, historical understanding should not be confused with everyday understanding, which means assimilation the meaning of something (words, sentences, motives, deeds, actions, etc.).
In the process of historical interpretation, understanding the text of a testimony or document is also associated, first of all, with the disclosure of the meaning that the author put into it. Obviously, with this approach, the meaning of the text remains something given once and for all, unchangeable and can only be identified and learned once. Without denying the possibility of such an approach to understanding in the process of everyday speech communication and even during training, it should, however, be emphasized that this approach is inadequate and therefore ineffective in more complex cases, in particular in historical knowledge. If understanding is reduced to the assimilation of the original, fixed meaning of the text, then the possibility of revealing its deeper meaning, and, consequently, a better understanding of the results of people’s spiritual activity is excluded. Consequently, the traditional view of understanding as the reproduction of the original meaning needs clarification and generalization. Such a generalization can be made on the basis of the semantic approach to interpretation, according to which the meaning or meaning Can also attach to the text as a sign structure, i.e. understanding depends not only on the meaning given to the text by the author, but also by the interpreter. Trying to understand, for example, a historical chronicle or testimony, the historian reveals the original author's meaning, but also brings something of himself, since he approaches them from certain positions, personal experience, his own ideals and beliefs, the spiritual and moral climate of his era, his value and worldview ideas. Therefore, in such conditions it is hardly possible to talk about one thing - the only correct understanding
The dependence of understanding a text on the specific historical conditions of its interpretation clearly shows that it cannot be reduced to a purely psychological and subjective process, although the personal experience of the interpreter plays an important role here. If understanding were entirely reduced to the subjective perception of the meaning of a text or speech, then no communication between people and mutual exchange of the results of spiritual activity would be possible. Psychological factors such as intuition, imagination, empathy, etc. are undoubtedly very important for understanding works of literature and art, but to comprehend historical events and processes, a deep analysis of the objective conditions of social life is necessary. However, V. Dilthey tried to build a methodology of historical and humanitarian knowledge exclusively on the psychological concept of understanding. “Any attempt to create an experimental science of the spirit without psychology,” he pointed out, “can in no way lead to positive results.” Apparently, guided by this idea, in his last work on the history of philosophy, he reduces the study of this history to the study of the psychology of philosophers. This approach could not but arouse critical objections even from scientists who generally sympathized with his anti-positivist views on history and the humanities.
The process of understanding in a broad context is comprehensive a problem whose solution requires the use of various means and methods of specific research. The use of textual, axiological, paleographic, archaeological and other special research methods acquires a special role in historical knowledge.
The origins of this method are in the techniques of text interpretation, the basis of which is the inclusion of textual information in a broader context of knowledge with interpretation, i.e. “translation”, with the addition of additional meanings recorded in the text (searches for the “second”, hidden meaning). The text itself is presented as a problem, where there is something known and something unknown that requires its own interpretation. The tradition of considering the method of understanding began with the works of F. Schleiermacher, who spoke of the “art of understanding” as the ability to move from one’s own thoughts to the thoughts of understood writers. He also put forward the main goal of hermeneutics: to understand the author better than he understands himself.
X. Yu. Habermas considered the psychoanalytic interaction between doctor and patient as the initial model of hermeneutic interpretation. From his point of view, psychoanalysis has gone beyond the hermeneutics of V. Dilthey, since in this case psychoanalysis operates with symbolic constants, and does not remain within the limits of conscious experiences. Therefore, X. Yu. Habermas introduces the concept "deep hermeneutics" as the development of a method of understanding.
Understanding is used when it is required to cognize a unique, integral, non-natural object (which bears the “imprint of rationality”) by translating its characteristics into terms of the researcher’s “internal” language and, in the course of this translation, obtaining its assessment and “experience of understanding” as result of the process. It is to this reality that works of art, in particular, relate.
The speculative method is closely related to the hermeneutic method. However, the speculative method is a method of cognition abstracted from reality (not to say theoretical) and does not require source material (text, information about behavior, a set of inventions, etc.). At the very least, consideration of this material is not the task of a psychologist professing a speculative approach. His goal is to generate some generalized model of mental reality that corresponds to his intuitive ideas and explains the available set of empirical phenomena.
For a researcher using the hermeneutic method, the most important thing is the material and the result of its interpretation (fact). It is enough to compare the typical works of Z. Freud, “Leonardo” and “Psychology of the Unconscious”. In the first case, we have before us the classic result of the application of the hermeneutic method, namely, the interpretation of the facts of the biography of Leonardo da Vinci from the position of the psychoanalytic concept of personal development. In the second case, we have a presentation of the concept itself as a result of mental processes (intuition, metaphorical and conceptual rational thinking), explaining a certain set of facts, not claiming universality, i.e., the status of a theory, but only the status of a worldview ( teachings).
Classic variants of the hermeneutic method are graphological and physiognomistic methods, psychoanalytic interpretation, and a set of projective methods (at the interpretation phase, since at the implementation stage this is a measurement procedure). Hermeneutic methods also include such a traditional psychological method as the analysis of the products of activity. These include the biographical method.
Let us dwell on the main features and limitations of the hermeneutic method. Firstly, there is a dependence of the results of interpretations on the explicit or implicit scheme, concept, theory of mental reality that the interpreter follows. Secondly, the quality of interpretation is determined by the cultural level of the society of which the psychologist is a representative.
Thirdly, although the hermeneutic method is not absolutely subjective, since there is some initial substantive, verbal or behavioral material and support for interpretation in theoretical schemes and natural language, its results are not intersubjective knowledge. Each new interpreter gives a slightly different interpretation of the material. Not only will adherents of different concepts (for example, representatives of different directions of psychoanalysis) write different studies of the life path of dictators (be it Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, it is now fashionable), but also adherents of one concept can give inconsistent results. It can be assumed that the results obtained by the hermeneutic method, even when using the same interpretative scheme, depend on the type of personality of the researcher, more precisely on his individual mental characteristics.
It follows from this that the “plurality of truth” in hermeneutical research is fundamentally irreducible. At the very least, establishing the truth requires coordination of the points of view of several researchers. The basis for coordination will be ideas about the psyche, recorded in natural language and/or all fundamental psychological knowledge obtained at a given historical moment. Since the coordination procedure is absolutely necessary to obtain intersubjective knowledge [Popper K., 1983], the hermeneutic method presupposes the presence of several researchers.
The problem of combining the specific life experience of a researcher with the requirements of scientific reliability (the problem of obtaining universally significant statements) within hermeneutics has not been solved within hermeneutics. From its very inception, the hermeneutic method was actually a psychological method. Its main feature is direct knowledge of the mental reality of another (modeling in the psyche of the researcher the mental reality of the subject).
The scope of application of the hermeneutic method is unique, holistic, possessing “mind” objects. There are various modifications of the psychological hermeneutic method, the main ones include: the biographical method, analysis of the results (products) of activity, the psychoanalytic method. The hermeneutic method does not satisfy the requirements of invariance of knowledge in relation to the subject of research activity.
There is probably no more complex and at the same time more important thing in the world than understanding. To understand another person, to understand the meaning of the text intended by the author, to understand oneself...
Understanding is the central category of hermeneutics. Sounds truly fundamental. That’s right: hermeneutics as a philosophical direction and hermeneutics as a methodology originate in ancient times, and they can be applied, perhaps, to almost any area of life. But first things first.
Emergence and development
There is a god Hermes in ancient Greek mythology. In his winged sandals, he moves freely between the earth and Olympus and conveys the will of the gods to mortals, and the requests of mortals to the gods. And he doesn’t just convey, but explains, interprets, because people and gods speak different languages. The origin of the term “hermeneutics” (in Greek – “the art of interpretation”) is connected with the name of Hermes.
Also, this art itself originated in the ancient era. Then the efforts of hermeneuts were aimed at identifying the hidden meaning of literary works (for example, the famous “Iliad” and “Odyssey” of Homer). In the texts closely intertwined with mythology at that time, they hoped to find an understanding of how people should behave so as not to incur the wrath of the gods, what can be done and what cannot be done.
Legal hermeneutics is gradually developing: explaining to the common people the meaning of laws and rules.
The revival is marked by the division of hermeneutics into hermeneutika sacra and hermeneutika profana. The first analyzes sacred (sacred) texts, and the second - in no way related to the Bible. Subsequently, the discipline of philological criticism grew from profane hermeneutics, and now in literary criticism hermeneutics is used very widely: from searching for the meaning of partially lost or distorted literary monuments to commentary on a work.
The Reformation had a huge influence on the development of hermeneutics - the movement of the 16th - early 17th centuries for the renewal of Catholic Christianity, which led to the emergence of a new religious belief - Protestantism. Why huge? Because the canon, the guideline for biblical interpretation, had disappeared, and interpreting its text now presented a much more difficult task. At this time, the foundations of hermeneutics were laid as a doctrine of methods of interpretation.
Schleiermacher paid special attention to the author of the text. What kind of person is he, why does he tell the reader this or that information? After all, the text, the philosopher believed, at the same time belongs to the language in which it was created and is a reflection of the personality of the author.
Schleiermacher's followers pushed the boundaries of hermeneutics even wider. In the works of Wilhelm Dilthey, hermeneutics is considered as a philosophical doctrine of interpretation in general, as the main method of comprehending the “spiritual sciences” (humanities).
Dilthey contrasted these sciences with natural sciences (about nature), which are comprehended by objective methods. The sciences of the spirit, as the philosopher believed, deal with direct mental activity - experience.
Later, hermeneutics turns into a way of human existence: “to be” and “to understand” become synonymous. This transition is associated with the names of Martin Heidegger, Hans-Georg Gadamer and others. It was thanks to Gadamer that hermeneutics took shape as an independent philosophical direction.
Beginning with Schleiermacher, hermeneutics and philosophy are intertwined more and more closely, and ultimately philosophical hermeneutics is born.
Basic Concepts
So, as our brief story about the emergence and development of hermeneutics showed, this term is multi-valued, and at present we can talk about three main definitions of this word:
- Hermeneutics is the science of interpreting texts.
- A philosophical direction in which understanding is interpreted as a condition of being (philosophical hermeneutics).
- Method of cognition, comprehension of meaning.
However, all hermeneutics is based on similar principles, and therefore the main provisions of hermeneutics are highlighted. There are four in total:
- Hermeneutic circle.
- The need for pre-understanding.
- Infinity of interpretation.
- Intentionality of consciousness.
Let's try to briefly explain these principles of hermeneutics and start with the most significant one - the hermeneutic circle.
Pre-understanding is our initial judgment about what we will learn, a preliminary, uncritical understanding of the subject of knowledge. In classical, rationalist-based philosophy (that is, in the 18th–19th centuries), preunderstanding was equated with prejudice and, therefore, was considered to interfere with the acquisition of objective knowledge.
In the philosophy of the 20th century (and, accordingly, in philosophical hermeneutics), the attitude towards preunderstanding changes to the opposite. We have already mentioned the outstanding hermeneutic Gadamer. He believed that pre-understanding is a necessary element for understanding. A completely purified consciousness, devoid of any prejudices and initial opinions, is unable to understand anything.
Let us recall the hermeneutic circle. We compare the pre-understanding with the new text, making it, the pre-understanding, open to change. The text is learned on the basis of pre-understanding, and pre-understanding is revised after understanding the text.
The principle of infinity of interpretation says that a text can be interpreted as many times as desired; in one or another system of views, a different meaning is determined each time. The explanation seems final only until a new approach is invented that can show the subject from a completely unexpected side.
The proposition about the intentionality of consciousness reminds us of the subjectivity of cognitive activity. The same objects or phenomena can be perceived as different depending on the orientation of the consciousness of the one who knows them.
Application in psychology
As we have found out, in each period of its development, hermeneutics was closely connected with one or another area of knowledge about the world. Types of hermeneutics arose one after another: first philological, then legal and theological, and finally philosophical.
Among the hermeneutic methods used in modern psychology, one should first of all name projective methods (but at the stage of interpretation, because at the stage of implementation they represent a measurement procedure), the biographical method and some others. Let us recall that projective techniques involve placing the subject in an experimental situation with many possible interpretations. These are all kinds of drawing tests, tests of incomplete sentences, and so on.
Some sources include graphological and physiognomic methods in the list of hermeneutic methods used in psychology, which seems very controversial. As is known, in modern psychology, graphology (the study of the connection between handwriting and character) and physiognomy (a method of determining the character and state of health by the structure of a person’s face) are considered examples of parasciences, that is, only currents accompanying recognized knowledge.
Psychoanalysis
Hermeneutics interacts very closely with such a branch of psychology as psychoanalysis. The direction, called psychological hermeneutics, is based, on the one hand, on philosophical hermeneutics, and on the other, on the revised ideas of Sigmund Freud.
Free dialogue assumes that the patient himself chooses the form and theme of his narrative, and based on these parameters, the psychoanalyst makes primary conclusions about the state of the speaker’s inner world. That is, in the process of interpreting the patient’s speech, the doctor must determine what the disease that has affected him is, as well as why it appeared.
It is impossible not to mention such a remarkable representative of psychoanalytic hermeneutics as Paul Ricoeur. He believed that the hermeneutical possibilities of psychoanalysis are practically limitless. Psychoanalysis, Ricoeur believed, can and should reveal the meaning of symbols reflected in language.
And indeed, we will talk about the same event differently at home with a close friend or to a casual acquaintance in line. Thus, the true goals and motives of the speaker are hidden behind the mask of social rituals. The doctor’s task is to get to the bottom of the patient’s true intentions using hermeneutic methods. Author: Evgenia Bessonova