susan hekman from epistemology to ontology gadamer

8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/susan-hekman-from-epistemology-to-ontology-gadamer 1/20

HUMAN STUDIES 6, 205-224 1983)

F r o m E p i s t e m o l o g y t o O n t o l o g y :

G a d a m e r s H e r m e n e u tic sand W i t t gens t e i n i an Soc i a l Sc i ence*

S U S A N H E K M A N

Department o f Political Science

University of Texas at rlington

I n w h a t h a s b e e n c h a r a c te r iz e d a s th e p o s t - b e h a v i o r i s t o r p o s t - p o s i t i v i s t

e ra i n po l i t i c a l s c i ence and , m ore gene ra l l y , t h roughou t t he soc i a l s c i ences , an

i nc r ea s in g n u m b e r o f m e t h o d o l o g i c a l a p p r o a c h e s t o t h e s o c ia l s c ie n c e s h a v e b e e n

proposed a s a l t e rna t i ves t o t he d i sc red i t ed pos i t i v i s t pa rad i gm . The l i s t o f an t i -

pos i ti v is t m e t hod o l og i e s t ha t have b een a dv anc ed i s by t h is ti m e qu i te l eng t hy . I t

i n c l u d e s p h e n o m e n o l o g y , o r d i n a r y l a n g u a g e a n a l y s i s ( o r w h a t h a s c o m e t o b e

k n o w n a s W i t t g e n s t e i n i a n s o c i a l s c i e n c e s ) , s t r u c tu r a l is m , c r it ic a l t h e o r y , a n d

e t h n o m e t h o d o l o g y , a s w e l l a s s e v e r a l o f f s h o o t s o f th e s e a p p r o a c h e s . A l s o i n -

c l uded i n m os t o f t he se l is ts o f an t i pos i t iv i s t ap p ro ach es i s t ha t o f he rm eneu t i c s .

In r ecen t yea r s , i n f ac t , i n t e re s t i n he rm eneu t i c s has en j oyed a r ev i va l o f so r t s .

Bu t t he he rm eneu t i c s t ha t i s cu r ren t l y r ece i v i ng a t t en t i on am ong soc i a l and

po li ti ca l t heo r i s t s i s qu i t e d i f f e ren t f ro m t he h e rm eneu t i c s t ha t D i l t hey ad voc a t ed

as an a l t e rna t ive t o pos i t i v i s t soc i a l s c i ence a t the t u rn o f t he cen t u ry . Th e

h e r m e n e u t i c s r e f e r r e d t o i n c o n t e m p o r a r y d i s c u s s i o n i s m o s t c o m m o n l y t h e a p -

p r o ac h r o o t e d in th e w o r k o f H a n s - G e o r g G a d a m e r , a n a p p r o a c h t h a t r e p r e s en t s a

s i gn if ican t depa r t u re f r om t r ad i t iona l h e rm eneu t i c s . A n d a l t hough t he t r ad i t iona l

h e r m e n e u t ic s o f D i l th e y a n d S c h l e i e r m a c h e r h a v e n o t r e c e i v e d m u c h a t te n t io n in

r ec e nt y e a r s , G a d a m e r ' s w o r k h a s a r o u s e d n e w i n te r e st in h e r m e n e u t i c s b e c a u s e

i t r a i s e s a s e t o f i s sues pa r t i cu l a r l y r e l evan t t o con t em pora ry d i scuss i ons i n t he

m e t h o d o l o g y o f t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s .

G a d a m e r ' s w o r k h a s c o m e t o t h e a t t e n t i o n o f t h e s o c i a l s c i e n t i f i c c o m m u n i t y

p r i m a r i l y a s a r e s u l t o f t h e h e a t e d d e b a t e b e t w e e n G a d a m e r a n d J i i r g e n H a b e r -

m a s , a d e b a t e t h a t h a s b e e n a s t a p le o f G e r m a n i n te ll e ct u a l li fe f o r m a n y y e a r s .

T h i s d e b a t e h a s p r o v i d e d t h e c o n t e x t f o r th e d i s c u s s io n o f h e r m e n e u t i c s a m o n g

th e A n g l o - A m e r i c a n s o c i a l sc i e n ti s ts a s w e l l . 2 B u t a l t h o u g h t h e G a d a m e r - H a b e r -

*Correspondence and requests for reprints should be sent to: Susan Hekman, Department of

Political Science, University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington, TX 76019.

1The principal works in the Gadamer-Habermas dispute are Gadamer 1975); Habermas 1970);

and the collection of essays in Apel 1971).

2Two books have been most influential in introducing hermeneutics to the English-speaking

world: Bauman 0978) and Bleicher 0980).

205



206 HEKMAN

m a s d e b a t e h a s p e r f o r m e d a v a l u a b l e f u n c t io n in i n tr o d u c in g G a d a m e r ' s w o r k to

t h e A n g l o - A m e r i c a n s o c i a l s c i e n t i f i c c o m m u n i t y , i t h a s a l s o h a d t h e n e g a t i v e

e f f e c t o f r e s tr i ct in g d i s c u s s i o n o f h e r m e n e u t i c s a m o n g A n g l o - A m e r i c a n t h e o ri st s

to c o m p a r i s o n s b e t w e e n G a d a m e r a n d H a b e r m a s . A s a re s u lt t he b r o a d e r si g n if i-c a n c e o f G a d a m e r ' s w o r k f o r th e s o c i a l s c ie n c e s h a s b e e n l a rg e ly o v e r lo o k e d . 3 I t

is th e i n t e n ti o n o f th i s e s s a y t o b e g i n t o m o v e t h e d is c u s s io n o f G a d a m e r ' s

he rm ene u t i c s and i ts r e l eva nce fo r t he soc i a l s c i ences b eyo nd t he con f i nes o f t h is

d e b a t e . T h e f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n w i ll a t t e m p t t o r e v e a l th e b r o a d e r r e le v a n c e o f

G a d a m e r ' s w o r k b y c o n s i d e r i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n h i s a p p r o a c h a n d t h a t

w h i c h h a s b e e n a d v a n c e d b y t h e f o l lo w e r s o f W i t tg e n s t e in in th e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s.

T h e s e t w o a p p r o a c h e s e x h i b i t a n u m b e r o f s t ro n g a f f i n it ie s a s w e l l as a n u m b e r o f

equa l l y s t rong d i f f e rences . Cons i de ra t i on o f t he se d i f f e rences and s i m i l a r i t i e sw i ll s e r v e t o h i g h li g h t t h e r e l e v a n c e o f G a d a m e r ' s a p p r o a c h f o r s e v e r a l is s u es

c e n t r a l to c o n t e m p o r a r y m e t h o d o l o g i c a l d i sp u t e s i n t h e s o c ia l s c i e n c e s , p a r t ic u -

l a r l y t he r e l a t i onsh i p be t w een t he na t u ra l and t he soc i a l s c i ences , and t he ro l e o f

l anguage i n soc i a l t heo ry . A l t hough t hese i s sues have been r a i sed i n t he G ada -

m e r - H a b e r m a s d e b a t e , t h e y h a v e o n l y b e e n d i s c u s s e d in th e n e c e s s a r i ly p a r o c h ia l

con t ex t o f t he i r r e l evance t o c r i t i c a l t heo ry .

T h e c o m p a r i s o n o f t h e tw o a p p r o a c h e s w i ll b e d i v id e d i nt o th r e e p r in c i p al

s e c t io n s . I n th e f i r st s e c ti o n t h e b a s ic t e n e ts o f G a d a m e r ' s a p p r o a c h w i ll b eou t l i ned . The second sec t i on w i l l exp l i ca t e t he s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e rences be -

t w e e n G a d a m e r ' s a p p r o a c h a n d t h a t o f W i t tg e n s t e in i a n s o c i al s ci e n c e . T h e t h ir d

sec t i on w i l l a t t em pt t o d raw som e conc l us i ons w i t h r ega rd t o t he r e l a t i ve advan -

t a g e s o f G a d a m e r ' s a p p r o a c h f o r c o n t e m p o r a r y s o c i a l t h e o r y . I t w i l l b e a r g u e d

t h a t, i n c o m p a r i s o n t o W i t tg e n s t e i n ia n s o c i a l s c i e n c e , G a d a m e r ' s a p p r o a c h o f f e rs

s o m e d e f i n it e a d v a n t a g e s b e c a u s e it s i d e s te p s a n u m b e r o f i s s u es t h a t h a v e b e e n

pa r t i cu l a r ly p ro b l em a t i c fo r the W i t tgens t e i n i ans . Bu t i t w i ll a l so be a rgued t ha t

t h e b r o a d e r s i g n i f i c a n c e o f G a d a m e r ' s p o s i t i o n r e s t s i n t h e f a c t t h a t i t d e m o n -s t r a t e s t ha t an an t i pos i t i v i s t app roach t o t he soc i a l s c i ences can avo i d t he ob j ec -

t iv i s m o f p o s i t i v i s m w i th o u t s e e k i n g a n a b s o l u t e f o u n d a t i o n f o r so c i a l t h o u g h t o r

r e t r ea t i ng i n t o t he ex t r em e re l a t i v i sm o f t he Wi t t gens t e i n i an pos i t i on .

G A D A M E R ' S M E T H O D O L O G Y

The U niversali ty o f H erm eneu tics

In Truth and Method G a d a m e r a d v a n c e s a d e f i n it io n o f h e r m e n e u t i c s t h at

s e ts h is a p p r o a c h a p a r t f r o m t h e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l a n d m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c o n c e r n s o f

S c h l e i e r m a c h e r a n d D i l th e y : H e r m e n e u t i c s is th e s t u d y o f th e u n i v e r s a l p h e -

n o m e n o n o f h u m a n u n d e r s ta n d in g . T h u s , o n G a d a m e r ' s d e fi n it io n , h e r m e n e u ti cs

Two accounts that do m ove outside the context of the Gadamer-Habermasdeb ate are Gunnetl(1979) and G iddens (1976).



FROM EPISTEMOLOGYTO ONTOLOGY 20 7

can n o t b e d e f in ed so le ly as a me th o d o lo g ica l ap p ro ach to th e h u man sc ien ces .

Ra th er , t h e m eth o d o f h e rm en eu t i cs m u s t b e a u n iv e rsa l o n e b ecau se i ts su b jec t i s

u n iv e r sa l ly ap p l i cab le . Gad amer ' s t a sk in Truth and Method is to establ ish the

h i sto ri ca l an d p h i lo so p h ica l g ro u n d w o rk fo r th is c l a im o f th e u n iv e r sa l i ty o fh e rme n eu t i cs an d to s ta t e i ts m a jo r imp l i ca t io n s . A t th e o u t se t , h o w ev e r , i t mu s t

b e c l ea r ly s t a t ed th a t a l th o u g h Gad amer ' s th es i s h as p ro fo u n d imp l i ca t io n s fo r

the human sc iences and , par t icu lar ly , fo r the i r def in i t ion v is-a-v is the natu ra l

s c ie n c e s , i t is n o t G a d a m e r ' s i n te n t to o f f e r a s p e c i f ic m e t h o d o l o g y f o r th e h u m a n

sc ien ces . H e in s i st s r ep ea ted ly th a t to in t e rp re t hi s w o rk in me th o d o lo g ica l t e rms

is to co n ce iv e o f i t t o o n a r ro w ly . H i s g o a l , r a th e r , is t o s tu d y h u m an u n d ers t an d -

in g , a p h e n o m e n o n e n c o m p a s s i n g t h e h u m a n s c ie n c e s b u t n o t e x c l u s i v e ly o f t h e i r

domain .G ad am er es tab l i sh es h i s th es i s b y d ev e lo p in g two l in es o f a rg u m en t . T h e f ir s t

i s h i s to r i ca l ly o r i en ted . He co n ten d s th a t th e p r in c ip a l e r ro r s o f co n temp o ra ry

p h i lo so p h y can b e l a id a t t h e f e e t o f th e E n l ig h ten m en t , an d d e f in es th e cen t ra l

e r ro r o f En l ig h ten m en t th o u g h t a s th e id en t if i ca tio n o f a ll t ruth w i th th e o b je c -

t iv e k n o w led g e p ro d u ced b y th e sc i en t if i c m e th o d . En l ig h ten me n t th in k er s, an d

Kan t in p a r t icu la r , we re th e f i rs t t o c l ea r ly a r ti cu la te th e ep i s t emo lo g ica l m o d e l

o f o b j e c t i v e k n o w l e d g e t h at h a s b e c o m e t he h a l lm a r k o f s u b s e q ue n t p h il o -

s o ph ic a l t h o u gh t . T h i s m o d e l e x c l u d e s f r o m t h e r e a l m o f t r u t h a ll h u m a nex p er i en ce n o t p ro d u c ed th ro u g h t ad h e ren ce to th e sc i en t i fi c m e th o d . Th u s i t is

Kan t ' s i d en t i f i ca t io n o f t ru th w i th meth o d th a t se t s th e s t ag e fo r Gad amer ' s

analysis:

Kant's transcendental analysis m ade it impossible to acknowledge the claimto truth o f the [humanist] tradition. (1975, p. 38)

G a d a m e r ' s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e c e n t r a l e r r o r o f E n l i g h t e n m e n t t h o u g h t i scrucia l no t on ly to the def in i t ion o f his p ro je c t , bu t a lso to an unders tan d ing o f h is

d ep ar tu re f ro m b o th th e 1 9 th cen tu ry t r ad i t io n o f h e rm en eu t i cs , an d , m o re g en er -

a l ly , to the humanis t t rad i t ion that arose in response to the Enl igh tenment .

Gad amer ' s p r in c ip a l a rg u men t i s th a t th e h e rmen eu t i c an d h u man i s t t r ad i t io n s

b o th accep ted , w i th o u t q u es t io n , th e v a l id i ty o f th e ep i s t emo lo g ica l mo d e l o f

o b j e c t i v e k n o w l e d g e f o r m u l a t e d b y K a n t . M o r e s p e c i f ic a l l y , h e a r g ue s t ha t

D i l th ey an d Sch le ie rmach er , b ecau se th ey imp l i c i t ly accep ted th e Kan t i an fo r -

mu la t io n , n ecessa r i ly co n ce iv ed o f th e m eth o d o f th e so c ia l sc i en ces in o p p o s i -t io n to th e meth o d o f th e n a tu ra l sc i en ces . Th ey th u s h ad n o reco u rse b u t to

a t temp t to f i t t h e so c ia l sc i en ces in to th e ep i s t emo lo g ica l m o d e l p ro v id ed b y th e

sc ien ti f ic me th o d o f th e n a tu ra l sc i en ces . I t was fo r th i s r easo n , G ad a m er a rg u es ,

t ha t t he 1 9th c e n t u r y ' s d e b a t e s o v e r m e t h o d w e r e t o o n a r r o w l y c o n c e i v e d , a n d

h en ce d o o med to f a i lu re (1 9 7 5 , p . 1 8 ) .

Th i s h i s to r i ca l an a ly s i s ex p la in s th e imp o r tan ce o f th e seco n d a rg u men t

G a d a m e r a d v a n c e s i n Truth and Method the aes th e t i c a rg u men t . A l th o u g h



208 HEKMAN

G a d a m e r ' s d i s c u s s io n o f a e s t h e ti c s p r e c e d e s h i s d e t a il e d a n a l y s i s o f th e e r ro r s o f

D i l t h e y a n d S c h l e i e r m a c h e r , i n a n i m p o r t a n t w a y i t c o m p l e t e s t h a t a r g u m e n t .

B e c a u s e h i s h is t o ri c a l a r g u m e n t c o n c l u d e s t h a t th e s t a tu s o f t h e h u m a n s c i en c e s

c a n n o t b e c a s t i n n a r r o w m e t h o d o l o g i c a l t e r m s , a n d c e r t a in l y n o t in t e r m s o f i tso p p o s i t i o n t o th e m e t h o d s o f th e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s , i t is i n c u m b e n t o n G a d a m e r to

p r o v i d e a b r o a d e r s c o p e f o r th e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f th e s t a tu s o f t h e h u m a n s c i e n c e s.

T h i s is e s t a b l is h e d in h i s d e s c r i p t io n o f a n e x p e r i e n c e o f t r u t h w h o l l y d i st in c t

f r o m t h e o b j e c t i v e k n o w l e d g e o f t h e n a t u ra l s c i e n c e s: t h e a e s th e t ic e x p e r i e n c e .

Rhe t o r i ca l l y , he a sks :

Is there to be no know ledge in art? Do es not the experience of art contain a

claim to truth which is certainly different from that of science, but equallycertainly is not inferior to it? (1975, p. 87)

I n h is a n a l y s i s o f t h e a e s t h e ti c e x p e r i e n c e G a d a m e r f o c u s e s o n t w o d i m e n -

s i o n s o f th e e x p e r i e n c e o f t r ut h t h a t o f f e r a c o n t r a st t o th e m o d e l p r o v i d e d b y t h e

sc i en t if i c m e t hod . Th e f i r s t i s t ha t tru t h i s an expe r i en ce i n w h i ch t he kno w er i s a

cons t i t u t ive e l em en t o f the kno w l edg e a t t a i ned . In con t r a s t to the sc i en t if i c m ode l

o f o b j e c t i v e k n o w l e d g e w h i c h d e p i c t s t h e k n o w e r a s a p a s s i v e r e c i p i e n t o f

k n o w l e d g e a n d r e m o v e d f r o m its o b j e ct , G a d a m e r ' s a n a ly s is o f th e a e s th e ti c

e x p e r i e n c e r e v e a l s t h e k n o w e r a s a n a c t i v e p a r t i c i p a n t i n t h e p r o c e s s . S e c o n d ,

G a d a m e r ' s a n a l y s is r e v e a l s t h a t in t h e a e s th e t ic e x p e r i e n c e , t r u th h a s a n o n t o l o g i -

ca l d i m ens i on . Th e sc i en t i f ic m ode l desc r i bes t he ac t o f know i ng a s s tr i c tl y

e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l , t h a t is , c o n c e m e d s o l e l y w i th t h e c o n s t it u ti o n o f t h e o b j e c t o f

k n o w l e d g e . B u t G a d a m e r ' s a n a l y s i s r e v e a l s t h a t k n o w l e d g e i n v o l v e s t h e g r a s p -

i ng o f an ob j ec t t ha t is s i m u l t aneo~ 8 t y r evea l i ng i t s e l f t o the kn ow er . In h is

w o r d s , o n t o l o g y p r e c e d e s e p i s t e m o l o g y ; t h e a c t o f k n o w i n g e n t a i ls t h a t b e i n g is

r evea l ed .

B o t h t he h i s to r ic a l a r g u m e n t a n d t he e x a m i n a t i o n o f th e a e s t h e ti c e x p e r i e n c e

o f tr u th l e a d G a d a m e r t o th e s a m e c o n c l u si o n : t he i n a d e q u a c y o f t h e e p is -

t e m o l o g i c a l m o d e l o f o b j e c t i v e k n o w l e d g e p r o v i d e d b y th e s c ie n t if ic m e t h o d .

H i s ana l ys i s r evea l s t ha t t h i s m ode l i s no t , a s i t s p roponen t s have c l a i m ed , t he

m o d e l o f a ll p o s s i b l e k n o w l e d g e . R e s t ri c ti n g t r u t h t o t he p r o d u c t s o f s c ie n t if ic

m e t hod den i e s t he va l i d i t y o f t ru th c l a i m s , such a s t ha t o f the ae s t he t i c expe r i -

ence , t ha t do no t f i t t he sc i en t i f i c m ode l . Bu t , a s G adam er i s w e l l aw are , t h i s

c r i ti que o f t he sc i en ti f ic m od e l canno t , a l one , e s t ab l i sh h is the s i s . Ra t he r , h e

m u s t tu r n t o th e m o r e p o s i t i v e ta s k o f e x a m i n i n g t h e f u n d a m e n t a l n a t u re o f

hum an und e r s t and i ng and i den t i fy i ng i t s va r i ous m an i fe s t a t i ons . I t is a t t h is po i n t

in h is a n a l y s i s t h a t G a d a m e r ' s r e l i a n c e o n H e i d e g g e r c o m e s t o th e f o r e . H e i d e g -

g e r p r o v i d e s G a d a m e r w i th t h e d i s ti n c ti v e o r i e n ta t io n t h a t s e ts h i m a p a r t f r o m t h e

1 9 t h c e n t u r y h e r m e n e u t i c s : t h e c o n c e r n w i t h o n t o l o g y . L i k e H e i d e g g e r ,

G a d a m e r d e f in e s u n d e r s ta n d i n g in o n t o l o g i c a l t e rm s :




Understanding is the original form of the realization of There-being Da-

sein), which is being-in-the-world. (1975, p. 230)

H e i d e g g e r ' s d e s c r ip t i o n o f t h e f o r e - s t r u c t u r e o f u n d e r st a n di n g p r o v id e s

Ga d am er w i th th e two cen t ra l e l em en t s o f th is th eo ry o f u n d ers tan d in g : p re ju -

d i c e a n d e f f e c t i v e - h is t o r i c a l c o n s c i o u s n e s s Wir ku n g s g es ch ich t l i ch es Be-

wusstsein) . At th e o u t se t G ad a m er id en t i f ie s p re ju d ice as an in t eg ra l p a r t o f h is

d e f in i t io n o f h e rmen eu t i cs .

This recognition that all understanding inevitably involves some prejudicegives the hermeneutic problem its real truth. (1975, p. 239)

H e g o e s o n t o i d e n t i f y t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t ' s f a i l u re t o g ra s p t h e p r o c e s s o f h u m a nu n d ers t an d in g in t e rm s o f th e i r f a i lu re to u n d ers t an d th e n a tu re o f p re ju d ice . H e

argues that

the fundamental prejudice of the enlightenment is the prejudice againstprejudice itself. (1975, pp. 239-40)

S in ce mu ch misu n d ers t an d in g h as a r i sen w i th r eg ard to th e s ig n i f i can ce o f

G a d a m e r ' s a d v o c a c y o f p r e j u d i c e , i t is i m p o r t a n t t o s p e c i f y p r e c i se l y w h a t h eis n o t say in g ab o u t p re ju d ice . A l th o u g h p re ju d ice i s seen as u n av o id ab le ,

Ga d am er is n o t a rg u in g th a t i t sh o u ld b e accep ted in an y fo rm wi th o u t q u es tio n .

No r is h e a rg u in g th a t th e accep tan ce o f p re ju d ice en ta i ls th e ab an d o n m en t o f

reason . Ra th e r , t h ro u g h h i s an a ly s i s o f p re ju d ice h e i s a t temp t in g to es t ab l ish two

p o s i t iv e p o in t s w i th r eg ard to th e n a tu re o f u n d ers t an d in g . F i r s t , a l th o u g h

G adam er ins is t s tha t unde rs tand ing inev i tab ly invo lves p re jud ice , h is po in t is tha t

u n d ers tan d in g n ecessa r i ly in v o lv es th e exa min a t io n o f p re ju d ice . He sp eak s f r e -

q u e n tl y o f t h e t y r a n n y o f h i d d e n p r e j u d i c e a n d t h e n e e d t o o v e r c o m e t h ist y r an n y ( 1 9 7 5 , p p . 2 3 9 - 2 4 0 ) . S e c o n d , G a d a m e r is a tt e m p t in g t o s h o w t h a t t he

o p p o s i t io n o f r eas o n an d p re ju d ice th a t l ed th e En l ig h ten m en t to r e j ec t p re ju d ice

is i t se l f e r ro n eo u s . Fo r th e En l ig h ten m en t r easo n rep resen ted th e u n iv e r sa l; p re j-

u d ice th e lo ca l an d p a r t i cu la r . A g a in s t th i s G ad a m er a rg u es th a t b o th r easo n an d

p re ju d ice a re h i s to r i ca l ly g ro u n d ed :

Reason exists fo r us only in concrete, h istorical terms, i.e ., it is not its own

master but remains constantly dependent on the given circumstances in

which it operates. (1975, p. 245)

G ad am er ' s d esc r ip t io n o f th e ro le o f p re ju d ice in u n d ers t an d in g i s a l so c ru c ia l

to h i s d e f in i t io n o f h i s d ep ar tu re f ro m 1 9 th cen tu ry h e rmen eu t i cs . Gad amer ' s

u n d ers t an d in g o f p re ju d ice en ta il s th a t th e in t e rp re te r ' s p re ju d ice can n o t b e n ea t -

ly se t as ide in the ac t o f in terp re ta t ion . I t i s , ra ther , a nece ssary par t o f tha t ac t ,

W h e n D i l t h e y a n d S c h l e i e r m a c h e r d e f i n e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a s p l a c i n g o n e s e l f



210 HEKMAN

w i t h i n t he w r i t e r ' s m i n d , h o w e v e r , t h e y n e c e s s ar il y p r e s u p p o s e th is re m o v a l

o f p r e ju d i c e . I t is th i s a s p e c t o f 1 9th c e n t u r y h e r m e n e u t i c s , G a d a m e r c l a im s , t h a t

is fu n d a m e n t a l ly i n e r r o r . ( 1 9 7 5 , p . 2 6 1 ) I n t e r p r e t a ti o n , o n G a d a m e r ' s a c c o u n t is

t h e i n te r p l a y o f t h e m o v e m e n t o f t r ad i ti o n a n d t h e m o v e m e n t o f th e i n t e rp r e te r(1975 , p . 261 ) I t i s , i n o t he r w o rds , a d i a lec t i ca l p rocess . C om pa r i ng t h is p rocess

t o t he d i a l ec ti c o f ques t i on and an sw er , G ad am er a s se r ts t ha t t he re a re no p re -

c o n s ti tu t e d o b j e c t s in t h e h u m a n s c i e n c e s . R a t h e r , t he o b j e c t s o f h u m a n

sc i ence em erg e t h rough t he j ux t ap os i t i on o f the ques t ion p osed by t he inqu i r e r

and t he answ er an t i c i pa t ed i n t he t ex t (1975 , p . 253 ) .

T h e s e c o n d c o n c e p t c e n t ra l t o G a d a m e r ' s th e o r y is e f f e c t i v e - h i s t o r i c a l c o n -

s c i o u s n e s s . E f f e c t i v e h i s t o r y , h e s t a te s , is t h e d e m o n s t r a t io n o f t he e f f e c ti v i ty

o f h i s to ry w i t h i n und e r s t and i ng i t s e l f ( 1975 , p . 267 ) . T he a pp l i ca t i on o f e f f ec t i veh i s to r i ca l con sc i ou snes s i nvo l ves t he r ecogn i t ion t ha t unde r s t and i ng i s a k i nd o f

e f f e c t a n d k n o w s i ts e l f a s s u c h ( 1 9 7 5 , p . 3 0 5 ) . T h r o u g h h i s c o n c e p t o f e f f e c t iv e

h i s t o r i c a l c o n s c i o u s n e s s , G a d a m e r w i s h e s t o e m p h a s i z e t h a t o u r c o n s c i o u s n e s s

o f bo t h the p re se n t and t he pas t i nvo l v es an aw are ness o f t he i n f luences t ha t pa s t

even t s have had and t ha t ou r i n t e rp re t a t i ons o f t he se even t s w i l l be e f f ec t ed by

prev i ous i n t e rp re t a t ions o f t hem . U n de r s t and i ng , i n o t he r w ord s , i s r e f l ex i ve ; it

i nvo l ves an ope nne ss t o t r ad it ion t ha t pe rm i t s t he t r ad it ion t o speak . The h i s t o r -

i ca l co ns c i o us ne ss o f 19th cen t u ry he rm e neu t i c s and h i s t o r i c ism , i n con t r a s t ,l a c k e d t h is o p e n n e s s . T h e i r a p p r o a c h w a s o n e - s i d e d i n th a t it e n c o m p a s s e d o n l y

t he h i s t o r i c it y o f t he tex t to b e i n t e rp re t ed . Bu t t he se t h inke r s o ve r l ook ed t he f ac t

t ha t t he h i s t o r i ca l i t y o f unde r s t and i ng ex t ends t o t he i n t e rp re t e r a s w e l l a s t he

t e x t. W h a t o c c u r s i n t h e p r o c e s s o f u n d e r s ta n d i n g , t h e n , c a n m o s t a c c u r a t e l y b e

d e s c ri b ed a s a f u s i n g o f t w o h o r i z o n s - - th a t o f t he i n te r p re te r a n d t h at o f

the text :

Th e projecting o f the historical horizon, then, is only a phase in the process

o f understanding, and does not bec om e solidified into the self-alienation o f a

past consciousness, but is overtaken by our present horizon of understand-

ing. In the process of understanding there takes place a real fusing of hori-

zons which means that as the historical horizon is projected it is simul-

taneously rem ov ed . W e described the conscious act of this fusion as the task

o f the effective-historical consciousness. (1975, p. 273 )

G a d a m e r ' s d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e o p e n n e s s i n v o l v e d i n t h e p r o c e s s o f i n t e r p r e t a -

t io n is o f p a r t ic u l a r i m p o r t a n c e t o t h e c o n c e r n s o f t h is e x a m i n a t i o n b e c a u s e itp r o v i d e s h i m w i t h a p o w e r f u l c r it iq u e o f t h e o b j e c t i v e k n o w l e d g e i d en t if ie d

by t he sc i en t i f i c m ode l . Cen t r a l t o t h i s m ode l i s t he a s sum pt i on t ha t t he a i m o f

s c ie n t if i c t h o u g h t i s to c l o s e e x p e r i e n c e , t o r e m o v e t h e h i st o r ic a l e l e m e n t f r o m i t,

and t hus t o ob j ec t i fy it (1975 , p . 311 ) . F r om t h is i t f o l l ow s , a t t he ve ry l ea s t , tha t

t he sc i en t i f i c m e t hod and t he ob j ec t i f i ca t i on i t en t a i l s i s an i napprop r i a t e m e t hod

fo r t he i n t e rp re t a t ion o f t ex t s . Th e sc i en t i s t s ' c l o sed , ah i s t o r ica l app roac h has the

e f fec t , qu i te l i t e r a ll y , o f des t ro y i ng t he ob j ec t o f t he i n t e rp re t e r ' s inqu i ry . Bu t



FROM EPISTEMOLOGYTO ONTOLOGY 211

G ad a m er ' s p o s i t io n o n th is i s su e a l so p o in t s to a th es is o f b ro ad er s ig n i fi can ce .

H is an a ly s i s r ev ea l s th a t th e o b jec t iv e k n o wled g e o f th e sc i en t i f i c mo d e l i s a

h i g hl y u nu s u al f o r m o f t h e e x p e r i e n c e o f tr u th . T h e i m p l ic a t io n o f G a d a m e r ' s

an a ly s i s, t h en , is t h a t th e c lo se d , ah is to r ica l t r u th o f th e sc i en t if i c m o d e l , f a rf ro m rep resen t in g th e u n iv e r sa l fo rm o f a l l k n o wled g e , i s ap p ro p r i a t e to o n ly a

v ery n a r ro w ran g e o f s i tu a t io n s .

The Ontology of Language

In th e l a s t sec t io n o f Truth and Method G a d a m e r t u rn s t o t h e q u e s t io n o f t h e

i n te r fa c e b e t w e e n h e r m e n e u t i c s , o n t o l o g y , a n d l a n gu a g e . I t i s G a d a m e r ' s c o n -

ce rn w i th l an g u ag e th a t p ro v id es th e mo s t ex p l i c i t co n n ec t io n b e tween h i s

th o u g h t an d th a t o f Wi t tg en s te in an d , th u s , w i l l b e th e fo cu s o f th e fo l lo win g

co mp ar i so n to Wi t tg en s te in ian so c ia l sc i en ce . In th e l a s t sec t io n o f Truth and

Method a n d in a n u m b e r o f o t h e r w o r k s t h at a r e d e v o t e d e x c l u s i v e l y t o a d i sc u s -

s io n o f l a n g u a g e , m u c h o f w h a t G a d a m e r h a s t o s a y h a s a d i s ti n c tl y W i tt g e n st e in -

ian rin g . To b eg in , G ad am er ' s r easo n s fo r tu rn in g to an ex amin a t io n o f l an g u ag e

p ara ll e ls th a t o f W i t tg en s te in . Th e s t a t ed g o a l o f G ad a m er ' s h e rm en eu t i cs is to

ex am in e th e n a tu re o f h u m an u n d ers t an d in g , an d , h e d ec la res , s in ce a ll u n d er -

s tand ing i s l ingu is t ic , the focus o f th is examinat ion must be language i t se l f .

Ga d am er a r r iv es a t h is an a ly s i s o f lan g u ag e th ro u g h a d i scu ss io n o f th e n a tu re o f

in terpre ta t ion . S ince a l l in terp re ta t ion i s l ingu is t ic and a l l unders tand ing i s in -

t e rp re ta t io n , i t fo l lo w s th a t a l l i n t e rp re ta t io n t ak es p lace in th e m ed iu m o f

language (1975 , p . 350) . And fu r ther , tha t :

Linguistic interpretation is the form of all interpretation, even w hen w ha t is

interpreted is not linguistic in n a tu r e . . . W e must not let ourselves be

confused b y these form s o f interpretation w hich are not linguistic but in fact

presuppose language. (1975, p. 360)

S e v e r a l o f th e k e y a s p e c ts o f G a d a m e r ' s a n a ly s is o f t h e r o le o f l a n g u a g e a l s o

d i rec t ly p a ra l l e l t h e acco u n t g iv en b y W i t tg en s te in . L ik e Wi t tg en s te in , Gad am er

e m p h a s i z e s t ha t l a n g u a g e e n ta i ls a w a y o f l iv i n g ( f o r m o f l i f e ) t h a t is u n iq u e

to th e h u ma n an imal . H e a l so asse r t s th a t l an g u ag e i s n o t s imp ly a to o l ex c lu s iv e

to h u man b e in g s th a t , l i k e o th e r to o l s , can b e se t a s id e a f t e r u se . Ra th e r , h e

in si st s th a t h u m an b e in g s a re en c lo sed in l an g u ag e ; th a t al l o f o u r k n o w led g e o f

o u r s e l v e s i s e n c o m p a s s e d i n l a n g u a g e . F u r t h e r m o r e , G a d a m e r , l i k e W i t t g e n -s t e in , d esc r ib es l an g u ag e as a g a m e b ecau se , l i k e a g am e, l an g u ag e i s so m e-

th in g we en te r in to ; an ac t iv i ty th a t we sh are (1 9 7 5 , p . 4 4 6 ; 1 9 7 6 b , p p . 6 2 -6 3 ,

2 1 0 - 2 1 1 ) .

A l t h o u g h t h e s e s i m i l a r i t i e s b e t w e e n t h e a c c o u n t s o f l a n g u a g e o f f e r e d b y

G a d a m e r a n d W i t tg e n s t e i n a r e s i g n i fi c a n t, t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n t h e m a r e

imm ed ia te ly ap p aren t . Th e f i r s t d i f f e ren ce th a t can b e id en t if i ed is o n e o f p a rt i cu -

l a r imp o r tan ce to th e so c ia l sc i en ces : th e ap p ro ach to th e p o ss ib i l it y o f med ia t io n



212 HEKMAN

b e t w e e n l a n g u a g e g a m e s . B e c a u s e G a d a m e r ' s t h e o r y o f la n g u a g e i s r o o t e d in a

th eo ry o f in te rp re ta t io n , a cen t ra l a s p ec t o f h is ap p ro ach is an an a ly s is o f th e

n a tu re an d fu n c t io n o f med ia t io n . Th e in te rp re te r i s , o f co u rs e , u n av o id ab ly

in v o lv ed in t ran s la t io n b e tw een l an g u ag es . G ad a m er d e f in es th e t a sk o f th ein te rp re te r , an d , h en ce , o f h e rm en eu t i cs i t s e lf , a s th e b r id g in g o f p e r s o n a l o r

h is to r ica l d is tance between minds (1976b , p . 95) . Wit tgens te in , in con tras t , has

very l i t t le to say about th is i s sue , a s i lence that has no t gone unnot iced by h is

cr i t ics (Apel 1981 , p . 249) .

I t is an o th er a s p ec t o f G ad am er ' s th eo ry o f l an g u ag e , h o we v er , th a t r ep res en t s

th e mo s t s ig n i f i can t co n t ras t b e tween h i s ap p ro ach an d th a t o f Wi t tg en s te in .

F o l l o w i n g H e i d e g g e r , G a d a m e r d e f in e s l a n g u a g e i n o n t o l og i c a l t e rm s . H e c o n -

c u r s w i t h H e i d e g g e r ' s c e n tr a l t h es is t h a t l a n g ua g e is t h e H o u s e o f B e i n g a n dt h at b e i n g th a t c a n b e u n d e r s t o o d i s l a n g u a g e . B o t h H e i d e g g e r a n d G a d a m e r

a rg u e th a t i t is th ro u g h l an g u a g e th a t th e b e in g o f th e w o r ld i s r ev ea led an d , th u s ,

t h at i t i s o n l y t h r o u g h l a n g u a g e t h a t w e c a n b e s a id t o h a v e a w o r l d . T h e

re la t io n s h ip b e tween l an g u ag e an d wo r ld , fu r th e rmo re , i s r ec ip ro ca l : th e wo r ld

co m es to b e in g in l an g u ag e an d l an g u ag e h as i ts b e in g in th e fac t th a t th e wo r ld i s

r e p r e s e n t e d i n it . L a n g u a g e d i s c l o s e s t h e w o r l d t o u s. T h i s is w h y a n i m a l s,

wh o l ack l an g u ag e , a l s o l ack a w o r l d . I t i s in l an g u ag e , fu r th e rm o re , th a t th e

i n te r f a c e o f h e r m e n e u t i c s a n d o n t o l o g y i s e x p re s s e d . H e r m e n e u t i c s is c o n c e r n e dwi th l an g u ag e , an d l an g u ag e is th e fu n d am en ta l m o d e o f o p era t io n o f o u r b e in g

in th e wo r ld . I t i s th e med iu m th ro u g h wh ich co n s c io u s n es s i s co n n ec ted to

b e in g . T h e n a t u re o f t h i n g s a n d t h e l a n g ua g e o f t h i n g s , G a d a m e r c l a im s ,

h a v e t h e s a m e m e a n i n g ( 1 9 7 5 , p p . 4 0 1 - 4 1 1 ) . B y s t u d y i n g o n e w e s t u d y t h e

o th er .

I t is no t d i f f icu l t to ide n t i fy how th is v iew o f language is in con f l ic t wi th the

cen t ra l th ru s t o f Wi t tg en s te in ' s th eo ry . A l th o u g h b o th Ga d am er an d Wi t tg en s te in

s ee l an g u ag e as th e cen t ra l f ac t o f h u m an l i f e , co n s t itu t iv e o f th e fo rm o f li f e wek n o w as h u man , an d a l th o u g h b o th ch arac te r i ze l an g u ag e as a g ame, a s h a red

ac t iv ity th a t we e n te r in to an d a re en co m p as s ed b y , n ev er th e les s G ad am er ' s

o n to lo g ica l d e f in i t io n o f l an g u ag e p ro v id es a s h a rp co n t ras t to Wi t tg en s te in ' s

ap p ro ach . W i t tg en s te in ' s th eo ry o f l an g u ag e i s, a t ro o t , a s t ri c t ly ep i s t emo lo g ica l

o n e . H is in te res t in l an g u ag e i s d ic t a t ed b y th e th es is tha t we can k n o w n o th in g o f

th a t wh ich i s b ey o n d l an g u ag e b ecau s e i t i s a r ea lm ab o u t wh ich we can n o t

s p e a k . A n d , a l th o u g h G a d a m e r w o u l d n o t d i sp u t e W i t t g e n s t e in ' s e p i s te m o l o g i -

ca l p o in t , h i s in te res t in l an g u ag e i s d ic t a t ed b y an o n to lo g ica l p o s i tio n : we s tu d ylan g u ag e b ecau s e i t r ev ea l s b e in g . Th i s co n t ras t can b es t b e i l lu s t ra t ed b y th e

d i f f e re n t w a y s in w h i c h G a d a m e r a n d W i tt g e n s te i n d e f i n e t h e c o n c e p t l a n g u a g e

g a m e . W i t tg e n s t e in re f e r s t o l a n g u a g e a s a g a m e i n o r d e r t o e m p h a s i z e t h a t

l an g u ag e i s co n s t i tu t iv e o f h u m an ac t iv i ty ; th a t h u m an b e in g s d o th in g s w i th

w o r d s . G a d a m e r ' s p o s i ti o n , h o w e v e r , c a n b e s t b e c h a ra c t e r iz e d w i t h t h e s ta te -

m e n t , w o r d s d o t h in g s w i t h u s . H e us e s t h e g a m e a n a l o g y t o p o i n t o u t t h a t i t

i s no t the ca se that we p l a y g a m e s , b u t ra t h e r , t h at g a m e s p l a y us He a rg u es th a t

th e s ame i s tru e o f l an g u ag e :



FROM EPISTEMOLOGY TO ONTOLOGY 2 1 3

St r i c t ly sp eak in g , i t is n o t a m a t t e r o f o u r m ak in g u se o f wo r d s wh en we

sp eak . Th o u g h we ' u s e ' wo r d s , i t i s n o t i n th e sen se th a t we p u t a g iv en to o l

to u se a s we p lea se . W o r d s th em se lv es p r e sc r ib e th e o n ly way s we can p u t

t h e m t o u s e . O n e r e fe r s to th a t a s p ro p e r ' u s a g e ' - - s o m e t h i n g w h i c h do e s n o td ep en d o n u se , b u t r a th e r we o n i t , s in ce we a r e n o t a l lo wed to v io l a t e i t.

( 1 9 7 6 a , p p . 3 , 6 9 - 7 6 )

T h e m a j o r t a s k o f t he f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n w i ll b e t o a s s es s t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f

t h e s e c o n t r a s t in g v i e w s o f l a n g u a g e f o r t h e m e t h o d o l o g y o f th e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s .

G A D A M E R S H E R M E N E U T I C S A N D W I T T G E N S T E I N I A N

S O C I A L S C I E N C E 4

imi lar i t i e s

D e s p i t e t h e f a c t t h a t G a d a m e r s t a t e s u n e q u i v o c a l l y t h a t i t i s n o t h i s i n t e n t i o n

t o o f f e r a m e t h o d o l o g y f o r t h e s o c i a l s c ie n c e s , a n a n a l y s i s o f h i s p o s i t i o n c a n

n e v e r t h e l e ss p r o c e e d f r o m t h e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s o f h is t h o u g h t a s

o u t l i n e d a b o v e . T h i s o u t l i n e i n d i c a t e s t h a t, o n th e f a c e o f i t, a G a d a m e r i a n

m e t h o d o l o g y f o r t h e s o c i a l s c i e nc e s w o u l d h a v e a n u m b e r o f e l e m e n t s i n

c o m m o n w i t h t h e W i t t g e n s t e i n i a n p o s i t i o n . B e c a u s e o f h is o p p o s i t i o n t o b o t h

p o s i t i o n s , H a b e r m a s h a s c o r r e c t l y i d e n t i f ie d th e b a s i s o f t h e u n d e r l y i n g s i m i l a r i ty

b e t w e e n G a d a m e r a n d t h e W i t t g e n s te i n i an s . H a b e r m a s c r i t ic i ze s b o th G a d a m e r

a n d W i t t g e n s t e i n i a n s o c i a l s c i e n c e o n o n e c e n t r a l p o i n t : f a i l u r e t o p r o v i d e t h e

s o c i a l t h e o r is t w i t h a n A r c h i m e d e a n p o i n t o u t s i d e t h e s o c i a l a c t o r s ' l in -

g u i s t i c a l l y c o n s t i t u te d w o r l d b y w h i c h t h a t w o r l d c a n b e a s s e s s e d . B y c o n c e n t r a t -

i n g e x c l u s i v e l y o n l i n g is t i c u n d e r s t a n d i n g s , h e i n s is t s , b o t h G a d a m e r a n d W i t -

t g e n s t e i n d e n y t h e r e f l e c t i v e e l e m e n t t h a t i s a n e c e s s a r y c o m p o n e n t o f s o c i a l

s c i en c e . A l b r e c h t W e l l m e r h as s u m m a r i z e d H a b e r m a s ' p o i n t o n th is i ss u e v e r y

s u c c i n c t l y :

Her m en eu t i c an d l in g u i s t i c p h i lo so p h e r s h av e d en ied th e ( ep i s tem o lo g ica I )

p o ss ib i l i t y o f d ev e lo p in g a th eo r y wh ich wo u ld a l lo w u s to r eco n s tr u c t

h i s to r ica l d ev e lo p m en t s an d so c ia l ch an g es b y sy s t em a t i ca l ly t r an scen d in g

th e se l f - in t e rp r e t a t io n o f a so c ie ty an d i ts i n d iv id u a l s . Th ey h av e d en ied ,

i . e . , t h e p o ss ib i l i t y o f r eco n s tr u c t in g h i s to ri ca l p r o cesse s t ak in g p l ace in

t h e b a c k o f i n d iv i d u a l a g e n ts w h o s y s t e m a t i c a l ly d e c e i v e t h e m s e lv e s a b o u tth e i r m u tu a l so c ia l r e l a t io n s an d ab o u t t h e m ean in g o f t h e i r o wn ac t io n .

(1976, p . 253)

I n h i s r e p l y t o t h i s c r i t i c i s m , G a d a m e r , l i k e t h e W i t t g e n s t e i n i a n s , f r e e l y a d m i t s

h i s f a i l u r e i n t h is r e s p e c t . H i s r e b u t ta l , f u r t h e rm o r e , h a s m u c h in c o m m o n

4The understanding of the ordinary language method ology for the social sciences use d in this

discussion is raken primarily from W ittgenstein 095 8), W inch 09 58), Louch, (t966), Pitkin, 097 2)

and Bernstein, 0976 ).



2 1 4 H E K MA N

w i t h t h e r e p li e s o f t h e W i t t g e n s t e i n i a n s t o s i m i l a r a t ta c k s , L i k e W i t tg e n s t e i n ,

G a d a m e r c l a i m s t h a t th e l im i t s o f la n g u a g e a r e th e l im i ts o f o u r w o r l d . H a b e r -

m a s ' c l a i m t h a t t h e s o c i a l a c t o r s ' l i n g u i s t i c a l l y a r ti c u la t ed c o n s c i o u s n e s s m u s t

b e s u p p l e m e n t e d w i t h a n a n a l y s i s o f th e r e al it ie s o f w o r k a n d d o m i n a t i o n is a sm e a n i n g l e s s t o G a d a m e r a s it is t o t h e W i t tg e n s t e in i a n s . G a d a m e r ' s p r i n ci p a l

a r g u m e n t a g a i n s t H a b e r m a s is s i m p l y t o a sk f o r th e j u s ti f ic a t io n o f th is c l a i m t o

r e a l i t y t r a n s c e n d i n g t h e a c t o rs c o n c e p t s . S p e c i f i c a l l y , h e a r g u e s , f ir s t, t h a t

H a b e r m a s h a s fa il ed to sh o w h o w w o r k a n d d o m i n a t io n c a n b e s aid to b e r e a l ,

a n d s e c o n d , t h a t w h a t w e e n c o u n t e r in l a n g u a g e is e v e r y b it a s r e a l a s t h e

o b j e c t i v e f r a m e w o r k t o w h i c h H a b e r m a s a p p e al s. I n s h o rt , G a d a m e r a r g ue s

t h a t H a b e r m a s ' c l a i m to a r e a l it y o u t s i d e t h e l in g u i s t ic r e a lm is a b s o l u t e l y

a b s u r d ( 1 9 7 5 , p . 4 9 5 ; 1 9 7 6 b ; p . 3 1 ; 1 9 7 1 , p p . 6 8 - 7 0 , 2 9 2 ) . 5T h i s f u n d a m e n t a l a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n G a d a m e r a n d t h e W i t t g e n s t e i n i a n s t h a t

w e l i v e in a l i n g u i s t ic a l l y c o n s t i t u t e d w o r l d h a s a n u m b e r o f i m p o r t a n t i m p l ic a -

t io n s f o r th e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p o s i ti o n s e n t ai le d b y b o t h a p p r o a c h e s . F i rs t , s i n ce

b o t h G a d a m e r a n d t h e W i t tg e n s t e i n i a n s i n s is t o n th e l i n g u i s ti c a li ty o f t h e s o c i a l

w o r l d , i t f o l l o w s t h a t b o t h d e f i n e a n a l y s i s i n t h e h u m a n s c i e n c e s a s e x c l u s i v e l y

l i n g u i s t i c a n a l y s i s . T h e i n s i s t e n c e t h a t , a s W i n c h p u t s i t , l a n g u a g e a n d s o c i a l

r e l a ti o n s a r e t w o s i d e s o f t h e s a m e c o i n , h a s e li c it e d s t r o n g o b j e c t i o n s i n th e

s o ci al s c ie n ti fi c c o m m u n i t y . A G a d a m e r i a n m e t h o d o l o g y , s h o u ld it e v e r b ea r t i c u l a t e d , h o w e v e r , w o u l d l o g i c a l l y a d o p t t h e s a m e p o s i t i o n . S e c o n d , b o t h

G a d a m e r a n d t h e W i t tg e n s t e i n i a n s e x p l i c i t l y r e je c t th e q u e s t f o r t h e n a tu r a l

s c i e n t is t 's d e f in i ti o n o f o b j e c t i v e k n o w l e d g e i n t h e s o c ia l s c i en c e s a n d d e n y

t h a t t h e m o d e l o f f e r e d b y t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s i s a p p r o p r i a t e t o i n q u i r y i n t h e

s o c i al s c i e n c es . T h e a r g u m e n t s t h a t G a d a m e r o f f e rs i n su p p o r t o f h is p o s i t io n ,

f u r t h e r m o r e , a r e r e m a r k a b l y s i m i la r to t h o s e o f W i tt g e n s te i n ia n s . G a d a m e r ' s

a t ta c k o n t h e E n l i g h t e n m e n t ' s t r a n s c e n d e n t a l d e f i n it io n o f r e a s o n h a s m u c h in

c o m m o n w it h W i t tg e n s t e i n ' s p o i n t t ha t l o g ic is n o t a g i f t o f G o d . A n dG a d a m e r a s s e r t s , a l o n g w i t h W i n c h , t h a t t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n t h e n a t u r a l a n d

s o c i a l s c i e n c e s r e s t s o n t h e f a c t th a t t h e o b j e c t s o f th e s e s c i e n c e s a r e c o n s t i tu t e d

i n r a d i c a ll y d i f f e r e n t w a y s ( G a d a m e r 1 9 7 5 , p p . 2 4 5 - 2 5 3 ; W i n c h 1 9 5 8 , p . 1 3 3) .

A s e c o n d m a j o r s im i l a ri ty b e t w e e n t h e p o s it io n o f G a d a m e r a n d t h a t t a k en b y

t h e W i t t g e n s t e i n i a n s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s c a n b e i d e n t i f i e d a s t h e i r c o m m o n r e f u s a l t o

d i s c u s s s u b j e c t i v e i n t e n t i o n a l i ty . T h i s r e f u s a l i s , f o r b o t h p o s i t io n s , r o o t e d i n t h e

a s s u m p t i o n t h a t u n d e r s t a n d i n g d o e s n o t e n ta il r e f e re n c e t o m e n t a l e v e n t s.

G a d a m e r m a k e s h i s p o s i t io n o n t hi s i s su e v e r y c l e a r in Truth and Method H e

5Several comm entators have arg ued that H aberm as' em bracingo f h ermeneutics is a positive signfor the social sciences because it involves bridging the gap between two m ajor philosophical cam ps

(Misgeld, 19 76, p. 165 ; Ap el 197 1, p. 311 ). It has even been argu ed that there is no fundamentalmethodological difference betw een the two (Bub ner 1 975 , pp. 337 -352 ). The present analysis,

how ever, leads to qu ite a different conclusion : Hab ermas denies Ga dam er's basic thesis o f theuniversality o f herm eneutics. Th ere seems to m e to be no way o f resolving such a fundamentalopposition.



FROM EPISTEMOLOG YT O O N T O L O G Y 2 1 5

d e f i n e s h i s b r e a k w i t h 1 9 th c e n t u r y h e r m e n e u t i c s a n d h i s to r i c is m i n t e r m s o f h is

r e je c ti o n o f t h e n o t io n t h a t u n d e r s t a n d i n g m e a n s g e t t i n g i n si de t he a u t h o r ' s

m i n d . H e i n si st s, a g a i n s t D i l t h e y a n d S c h l e i e r m a c h e r , t h a t u n d e r s t a n d i n g a t e x t

is t h e p r o d u c t o f t h e d i a le c t i ca l i n t e r p l a y o f t h e i n t e r p r e t e r ' s q u e s t i o n a n d t h et e x t ' s a n s w e r . I n a n o t h e r c o n t e x t h e s u m m a r i z e s t h i s p o i n t v e r y n e a t l y :

W hen we understand a text we d o not put ourse lves in the place of the other ,

and i t is not a matter of penetrating the spiri tual activit ies o f the a u th o r . . .

Th e m ean ing o f hermeneutical inquiry is to disclose the miracle o f under-

s tanding texts or ut te rances and n ot the m yster ious com m unica t ion of souls .

U nde rstanding is a partic ipat ion in the co m m on aim. (19 79, p. 147 )

T h e p o s i ti o n t h a t t h e m e a n i n g o f a te x t is n o t d e p e n d e n t o n t h e s u b j e c ti v e

i n te n ti o n o f th e a u t h o r h a s b e c o m e a h a l lm a r k o f G a d a m e r ' s h e r m e n e u t i c t h e o r y

( P a l m e r 1 9 6 9 , p . 1 8 5 ) . A n d i t is l i k e w i s e a h a l l m a r k o f t h e W i t tg e n s t e i n i a n

p o s i t io n . O n e o f t h e p r in c i p a l t h e se s o f t h e w o r k s o f b o t h W i n c h a n d L o u c h is

t h e i r i n s i s t e n c e t h a t s u b j e c t i v e m e n t a l e v e n t s c a n n o t b e i n t e l l i g i b i l y d i s c u s s e d ,

a n d t h u s a r e n o t a p o s s i b l e s u b j e c t m a t t e r f o r th e s o c i a l s c ie n c e s . T h e b a s i c t h es i s

o f t h e ir a p p r o a c h t o s o c i a l a n a l y s i s is t h a t w h a t W e b e r la b e ll ed s u b j e c t i v e

m e a n i n g is p u b l i c ly av a i l a b l e d a t a e x p r e s s e d in t h e o r d i n a r y la n g u a g e c o n c e p t s

o f t h e s o c i a l a c t o r s . I n i t i a ll y , t h is p o s i t i o n w a s a r t i c u l a te d i n o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e

v rst h n t ra d it io n o f D i l th e y a n d W e b e r ( W i n c h 1 9 5 8 , p p . 1 1 1 - 1 2 0 ) . T o d a y i t

is m o r e l i k e ly t o b e c a s t in te r m s o f o p p o s i t i o n t o S c h u t z ' s s o c ia l p h e n o m e n o l o g y

o r e t h n o m e t h o d o l o g y ( R o c h e 1 9 7 3 ), 6 T h i s p o s i t io n i s, f u r t h e r m o r e , o n e o f t h e

m o s t d i s ti n c t iv e a n d c o n t r o v e r s i a l a s p e c t s o f th e W i tt g e n s te i n ia n a p p r o a c h .

I t c a n a l s o b e a r g u e d t h a t , in t h e c o n t e x t o f c o n t e m p o r a r y s o c i a l th e o r y , t h e

r e f u s a l t o d i s c u s s s u b j e c t i v e i n t e n t io n a l i t y r ep r e s e n t s a n im p o r t a n t c o m m o n a l i t y

b e t w e e n G a d a m e r a n d t h e W i tt g e n s t e in i a n s . T h e s ig n i f i c an c e o f th is c o m -

m o n a l i t y c a n b e s t b e i ll u st ra t ed b y r e f e r e n c e t o t h e o n g o i n g d e b a t e b e t w e e n

G a d a m e r a n d E r i c H i r s c h o n t h e ro l e o f a u t h o r ia l i n te n t io n . H i r s c h o b j e c t s t o

G a d a m e r ' s p o s i t io n o n t h e g r o u n d s t h a t, b y r e je c t in g t h e a u t h o r ' s i n te n t io n a s th e

b a s i s f o r t e x t u a l i n t e r p r e t a ti o n , G a d a m e r o b v i a t e s t h e p o s s i b i l i ty o f t h e o b j e c t i v e

i n te r p r et a ti o n o f t ex t s. H e c la i m s t h at G a d a m e r ' s t h e o r y , w h i c h h e l ab e ls s e -

m a n t ic a u t o n o m y , m a k e s it i m p o s s i b le t o j u d g e o n e i nt er p re ta ti on b e t t e r

t h a n a n o th e r . I n s t e a d , o n G a d a m e r ' s v i e w , c r i ti cs ra t h e r t h a n a u t h o r s b e c o m e

p a r a m o u n t . H i r s c h ' s c o u n t e r t o G a d a m e r c e n t e rs o n t h e d i s ti n c ti o n b e t w e e n

m e a n i n g a n d s i g n i f ic a n c e . H e d e f i n e s t h e m e a n i n g o f a t ex t a s w h a t th e a u t h o r

m e a n s t o s a y ; i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e a s t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t h a t m e a n i n g a n d a

61t shou ld be no ted th at although those in the W ittgensteinian tradition frequen tly engag e indiscussions of intentionality, they define this c oncep t in a fundam entally different way than do theHu sserlians. Fo r the W ittgensteinians, as R och e poin ts ou t, intentions are pu blicly available data thatdo not entail recourse to sub jective mental events.



2 1 6 HEKMAN

p e r s o n , c o n c e p t i o n , o r s it u a t i o n . T h u s , a l t h o u g h H i r s c h c l a i m s t h a t t h e m e a n i n g

o f a t e x t i s f i x e d a n d o b j e c t i v e b e c a u s e i t i s d e t e r m i n e d b y t h e a u t h o r ' s

i n t e n ti o n , i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e m a y v a r y d e p e n d i n g o n s p e c i f i c c o n d i t i o n s o r q u e s -

t io n s o f in t e r p r e ta t i o n ( H i r s c h 1 9 67 , p p . 4 - 1 0 ) .F r o m t he p e r s p e c t iv e o f G a d a m e r ' s t h e o r y o f u n d e rs t an d i n g o u t l in e d a b o v e ,

H i r s c h ' s p o s i t i o n i s h a r d l y a n e w o n e . H i r s c h , l i k e th e h i s t o r i c i s ts , f a i l s t o s e e

t h a t t h e d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f w h a t h e c a l l s t h e m e a n i n g o f a t e x t is a d i a l e c t ic a l

p r o c e s s . R a t h e r , h e a s s u m e s t h a t t h e i n t e r p r e t e r c a n d i s c o v e r t h e a u t h o r ' s i n t en -

t i o n f r o m a p o s i t i o n o f o b j e c t i v i t y f r e e f r o m t h e h i s t o r i c a l i n f l u e n c e s o f h i s / h e r

c u l tu r e . T h e i m p o r t a n c e o f H i r s c h ' s c r i t i c i s m in th i s c o n t e x t , h o w e v e r , l ie s n o t i n

i ts n o v e l t y , b u t r a t h e r in th e f a c t t h a t i t h i g h l i g h t s t h e c o m m o n a l i t y b e t w e e n

G a d a m e r ' s a p p r o a c h a n d t ha t o f t he W i t tg e n s t e in i a n s . A l t h o u g h H i r s c h ' s n o t i o no f i n t e n t io n a l i t y i s, a s D a v i d H o y p o i n t s o u t , p h i l o s o p h i c a l l y u n c l e a r , i t c a n

n e v e r t h e l e s s b e a s s e r t e d t h a t w h a t H i r s c h s m s t o b e a r g u i n g i s t h a t t h e d e t e r -

m i n a t i o n o f a u t h o r ia l m e a n i n g e n t a i ls r e c o u r s e t o s u b j e c t i v i ty a n d c o n s c i o u s n e s s

( H o y 1 9 78 , p 2 9 ) 7 A p p e a l i n g t o H u s s e r l ' s d i s t in c t i o n b e t w e e n i n n e r a n d

o u t e r h o r i z o n s , H i r s c h a r g u e s t h a t o b j e c t i v i t y i n t e x tu a l i n t e rp r e t a ti o n r e -

q u i r e s e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e t o t h e s p e a k e r ' s s u b j e c t i v i t y ( 1 9 6 7 , p p . 2 2 4 - 2 3 7 ) .

T h e f a c t t h at b o th G a d a m e r a n d t h e W i t t g e n s t e i n ia n s e s c h e w r e f e re n c e t o t h e

s p e a k e r ' s s u b j e c t i v i ty l e a d s t h e m t o a s s u m e t w o c o m m o n p o s i t io n s o f c o n s i d e r -a b l e i m p o r t a n c e f o r t h e m e t h o d o l o g y o f th e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s . F i r s t , i t e n t a i l s th a t

b o t h a p p r o a c h e s a v o i d t h e e r r o r o f a s s u m i n g t ha t th e s o c i a l a c t o r ' s s u b j e c t i v e

i n t e n ti o n s a r e t h e o b j e c t i v e f a c t s o f t he s o c i a l s c i e n c e s t h at p a r a l le l t h o s e o f

t h e n a t u ra l s c i e n c e s . T h u s , t h e y a l s o a v o i d t h e e r r o r o f m i m i c k i n g t h e m e t h o d s o f

t h e n a t u ra l s c i e n c e s b y s e a r c h i n g f o r t h e s e o b j e c t i v e f a c t s t h at w o u l d m a k e

s o c i a l s c i e n c e t r u ly s c i e n t i f i c . H i r s c h , o n th e c o n t r a r y , m a k e s th is e r r o r i n t h e

m o s t b l a t a n t w a y . H a v i n g a r g u e d t h a t th e a u t h o r ' s s u b j e c t iv e in t e n ti o n p r o v i d e s

t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s w i t h t h e i r o b j e c t i v e d a t a , h e c o n c l u d e s :

Th e id en t i ty o f g en r e , p r e - u n d e r s t an d in g , an d h y p o th es i s su g g es t s th a t th e

m u ch - ad v e r t i zed c l eav a g e b e tween th in k in g in th e sc i en ces an d th e h u m an -

i ti e s d o es n o t ex i s t . Th e h y p o th e t i co - d ed u c t iv e p r o cess i s f u n d am en ta l i n

bo th o f them , as i t i s in a l l th ink ing tha t asp i res to know ledge . (1967 , p . 246)

7Hirsch's confusion on this point is indicated by the fact that at one point he explicitly states that

the author's intention is not to be defined as a men tal process (1967. p. 32). But he freely refers tothe subjective intention o f the author and insists tha t the verbal mean ing o f a text is a w illed typ e

that an author expresses by linguistic symbols and can be understood by another through thosesymb ols (1967, p. 49). I think that it can be concluded that Hirscb fails to see the im portance of the

distinction between viewing the au thor's intention as a subjective men tal event that is translated into

language and viewing language and thought as indistinguishable. It should also be noted in thiscontext that Gadame r argues in reply to Hirsch that the sem antic autonom y of a text does not p recludea fixed mean ing for a particular historical period. T he tradition (prejudices) of a particular time fix atext 's meaning for tha t time.




T h e s e c o n d c o m m o n p o s i t io n d i c ta t e d b y t h e r e j e ct io n o f s u b j e c t iv e i n te n -

t i ona l i t y , how eve r , i s equa l l y s i gn i f i can t . By em phas i z i ng t he e s sen t i a l l y i n t e r -

s u b j e c t iv e n a t u r e o f u n d e r s ta n d i n g , b o t h G a d a m e r a n d W i t t g e n st e in p l a c e th e

h u m a n s c i e n c e s s q u a r e l y in t he c o m m o n w o r l d o f h u m a n p r a c t i c e s r a th e r t h a n int he s h a d o w y p r i v a t e w o r l d o f in d i v id u a l s u b j e c ti v it y . G u n n e l h a s n o t e d , a l o n g

w i t h W i t t g e n s t e i n , t h a t G a d a m e r i s p a r t o f a m o v e m e n t i n t h e h u m a n s c i e n c e s

a w a y f r o m s e e i n g d i s c o u r s e a s r e p r e s e n t i n g i d e a s a n d th o u g h t s o f s p e a k e r s .

These t h i nke r s , on t he con t r a ry , s ee t he d i s t i nc t i on be t w een l anguage and

t h o u g h t a s u n t e n a b l e ( 1 9 7 9 , p p . 1 1 6 - 1 1 7 ) .

T h i s c o m p a r i s o n b e t w e e n t he m e t h o d o l o g i c a l i m p li c at io n s o f G a d a m e r ' s t h e -

o r y a n d W i t t g e n s t e i n i a n s o c i a l s c i e n c e , t h e n , h a s r e v e a l e d t w o f u n d a m e n t a l

s i m i l a r it ie s : an i n s i s t ence o n t he l i ngu i s t ic cons t i t u t ion o f t he soc i a l w o r l d , an d are j ec t ion o f any d i scuss i on o f sub j ec t i ve i n t en t iona l i t y . In the con t ex t o f con t em -

pora ry i s sues i n soc i a l t heo ry , t he se s i m i l a r i t i e s a r e s i gn i f i can t because bo t h

i s sues have be en d i spu t ed a t l eng t h i n r ecen t d i scuss i ons . I t ha s been a rgued t ha t

t h e a g r e e m e n t o f G a d a m e r a n d t h e W i tt g e n s t e in i a n s o n t h e s e i ss u e s le a d s t h e m t o

a s s u m e a n u m b e r o f s i m i l a r m e t h o d o l o g i c a l s t a nc e s . T h e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l c o n -

v e r g e n c e b e t w e e n G a d a m e r a n d t h e W i t tg e n s t e i n i a n s , f u r t h e r m o r e , c a n b e tr a c e d

t o t h e i r b a s i c a g r e e m e n t o n t h e d e f i n i t i o n o f l a n g u a g e : b o t h d e f i n e l a n g u a g e a s

pub l i c d i scou r se r a t he r t han t he t r ans l a ti on o f inne r d i scou r se . I t is t h is ag reem en tb e t w e e n G a d a m e r a n d W i tt g e n s t e in o n t h e p u b li c n a tu r e o f l a n g u a g e th a t , m o r e

t han any o t he r f ac t o r , a ccoun t s fo r t he f ac t t ha t t he app roaches t o t he soc i a l

sc i ences gen e ra t ed by t he i r t heo r i e s exh i b i t s i gn i f i can t s i m i l a r it ie s . 8

Divergences

A l t h ou g h G a d a m e r ' s c o n c e r n w i th l a n g u a g e p r o v i d e s t he b a s is f o r t he c o m -

m on a l i t y be t w e en t h is app ro ach t o t he soc ia l s c i ences and t ha t o f the Wi t t gen -

s t e in i a n s , i t i s a ls o t h e s o u r c e o f th e m o s t s e r io u s o p p o s i t io n b e t w e e n t h e tw o

a p p r o a c h e s . I t w a s n o t e d a b o v e t h at G a d a m e r ' s o n to l o g i c a l a p p r o a c h t o t h e s t u d y

o f la n g u a g e d i v e r g e s f r o m t h e W i t tg e n s t e i n i a n s ' e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l a p p r o a c h . W h a t

m u s t n o w b e e x a m i n e d is th e i m p l ic a t io n s o f G a d a m e r ' s o n t o lo g i c al t ur n f o r his

a p p r o a c h to th e m e t h o d o l o g y o f t h e h u m a n s c i e n c e s , a n d h o w t h is a p p r o a c h

d i f f e rs f r o m t h a t o f t h e W i tt g e n s t e in i a n s . T h e f i r s t i t e m t o b e c o n s i d e r e d i s a n

i ss u e th a t i s f u n d a m e n t a l t o t h e b a s i c a r g u m e n t t h a t G a d a m e r p r e se n t s i n Truth

and Method t he p rope r r e l a t i onsh i p be t w een t he na t u ra l and t he soc i a l s c i ences .

O n e o f G a d a m e r ' s p r in c i p a l g o a l s in Truth and Method is to r e m o v e w h a t m i g h t

b e t e r m e d t he i n f e r i o r i t y c o m p l e x o f t he s o c ia l s c ie n c e s. T h e n e g a t iv e s id e o f

t h is a r g u m e n t w a s d i s c u s s e d i n t h e f i r s t s e c t io n o f t h is p a p e r : t h e e r r o r o f th e

E n l i g h t e n m e n t ' s i d e n ti f ic a t io n o f k n o w l e d g e w i t h s ci e n ti f ic m e t h o d . T h e r e is a

sOn this point see Hac king (1975.)



218 HEKMAN

p o s i t i v e s i d e to th i s a r g u m e n t a s w e l l . G a d a m e r a s s er ts t h a t t h e g o a l o f h is

i n q u ir y i s t o e x p l o r e t h e p h e n o m e n o n o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g , a p h e n o m e n o n t h a t is

p r i o r t o a l l m e t h o d o l o g i c a l d i s c u s s i o n s . I n t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n t o Truth and Method

he s t a t e s :

The question I have asked seeks to discover and bring into consciousness

som ethin g that methodological dispute serves on ly to conceal and neglect,

som ething tha t does n ot so mu ch con f ine or l imi t m odern sc ience as precede

it and m ak e it possible. (1975 , p . xviii)

G a d a m e r ' s a r g u m e n t w i th r e g ar d t o th e p r io r it y o f th e p h e n o m e n o n o f u n d e r-

s t a n d i n g h a s tw o i m p o r t a n t i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r h i s a p p r o a c h t o t h e h u m a n s c i e n c e s .

F i r st , i t e n t a il s t h a t h e d e f i n e s t h e o b j e c t i v e k n o w l e d g e o f t h e sc i e n ti f ic m e t h o d a s

a slb ecia l ca s e o f k n o w i n g r a t h e r th a n t h e u n i v e r sa l m o d e l o f a ll k n o w l e d g e . H e

a r g u e s t h a t t h e o b j e c t i v e s i t u a t i o n o f t h e n a t u r al s c i e n c e s is u n i q u e b e c a u s e ,

u n l ik e a ll o t h e r f o r m s o f u n d e r s t a n d i n g , i t s e e k s t o r e m o v e all s u b j e c t iv e e l e -

m e n t s f r o m t h e c o g n i t i v e p r o c e s s ( 1 9 7 5 , p . 4 1 I ) . F o r t h e n a tu r a l s c i e n c e s th e

u n i v e r s a l f a c t o f t h e l i n g u i s t ic a l it y o f o u r e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e w o r l d , a n d c o n s e -

q u e n t l y , t h e i n e s c a p a b i l i ty o f p r e j u d i c e , is se e n a s a n i n c o n v e n i e n c e t h a t m u s t b e

o v e r c o m e . T h e g o a t o f th e h u m a n s c i e n c e s , in c o n t r a s t, is t o e x a m i n e th is b a s ic

o n t o l o g i c a l fa c t o f h u m a n e x i s te n c e . G a d a m e r p u t s t h is p o i n t v e r y s u c c in c t l y in

h is d i s c u s si o n o f H u s s e r l ' s c o n c e p t s o f t h e Lebenswelt:

His analysis o f the ' l i fe -w or ld' Lebenswelt) and of this ano ny m ou s consti tu-

t ion o f all mean ing and significance which form s the groun d and texture o f

exp erience, sho w ed defini t ively that the con cep t o f object ivi ty represented

by the sciences exemplifies bu t a special case . (1979, p. 129)

T h e s e c o n d i m p l i c a ti o n o f t hi s p o s i ti o n , h o w e v e r , is o f e v e n g r e a te r s ig n i fi -

c a n c e . G a d a m e r a s se r ts t h a t b e c a u s e t h e su b j e c t m a t te r o f t h e h u m a n s c i en c e s ,

h u m a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g , is a p r e c o n d i t i o n f o r all k n o w i n g , t h e h u m a n s c i e n c e s ar e

l o g i c a l l y p r i o r t o t h e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s :

I f Verstehen is the basic mo m ent of hum an in-der-Welt-sein, then the human

sciences are nearer to hu m an self-understanding than the natural sciences.

Th e object ivi ty o f the la tter is no long er an unequivocal and ob l igatory ideal

o f k n o w l e d g e .

Because the hu m an sciences contribute to hum an self-understanding eve nthough they do not approach the natural sciences in exactness and objec-

tivity, th ey do contribute to hu m an self-understanding because they in turn

are based in hum an self-understanding. (1979, p. 106 )

O n t h e f a c e o f i t, i t m a y s e e m t h a t th i s v i e w is n o t n o t i c e a b l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h a t

e s p o u s e d b y th e W i t tg e n s t e in i a n s . L i k e G a d a m e r , t h e W i tt g e n s te i n ia n s t ak e g r e a t

p a i n s t o d i s t in g u i s h t h e s o c i a l f r o m t h e n a tu r a l s c i e n c e s . B u t t h e W i t t g e n s t e i n -




ian s ' p o s i t io n d i f f e r s f ro m Gad amer ' s in a n u mb er o f imp o r tan t way s . A l th o u g h

th e Wi t tg en s te in ian s c l ea r ly r e j ec t th e v iew th a t th e so c ia l sc i en ces mu s t mimic

th e mo d e l o f th e n a tu ra l sc i en ce s , t h ey , l i k e D i l th ey , imp l i c i t ly accep t th e mo d e l

o f o b j e c t i v e k n o w l e d g e e m p l o y e d b y t he n at ur al s c ie n ce s . B o t h W i n ch a n dLo u c h d ev o te a s ig n i f i can t p o r t io n o f th e i r an a ly ses to p ro v in g tha t th is m o d e l i s

n o t an ap p ro p r i a t e o n e fo r th e so c ia l sc i en ces (Lo u ch t9 6 6 , p . 1 63 ). T h e i r

a n a l y s e s , h o w e v e r , d o n o t g o b e y o n d t h is n e g a t i v e p oi n t. G a d a m e r a r g u e s th a t

t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t i s t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r o f t h e h u m a n s c ie n c e s p r e c e d e s

an d m ak es p o ss ib le th e sp ec ia l fo rm o f k n o w led g e ch arac te r i s t i c o f th e n a tu ra l

sc i en ces . He th u s e f fec t iv e ly tu rn s th e t ab les o n th e n a tu ra l sc i en ces b y sh o w in g

th a t th e so c ia l sc i en ces a re lo g ica l ly p r io r to th em. W in ch an d Lo u ch , in co n t ras t,

d o n o t m o v e b e y o n d t h e n a r r o w m e t h o d o l o g i c a l p o i n t t h a t t h e m e t h o d o f t h en a tu ra l sc i en ces can n o t b e u t i l i zed in th e so c ia l sc i en ces . Th ey fa i l , i n o th e r

wo rd s , t o p ro v id e a p o s i t iv e b as i s fo r th e so c ia l sc i en ces b ecau se th ey remain

cau g h t in th e meth o d o lo g ica l d i sp u tes ch arac te r i s t i c o f 1 9 th cen tu ry h e rmen eu -

t ics , the d ispu tes so s tern ly cas t igated in Truth and Method

I t sh o u ld b e emp h as ize d in th i s co n tex t , fu r th e rm o re , th a t G ad a m er ' s p o s i t io n

o n th is i s su e i s f i rm ly ro o ted in o n to lo g y . H i s b as i c a rg u m en t , an d th e so u rce o f

h is d iv e rg en ce f ro m th e W i t tg en s te in ian s , is t h a t th e h u man sc ien ces a re p r io r to

th e n a tu ra l sc i en c es b ec au se th ey in v es t ig a te th e ontological co n d i t io n o f man inthe wor ld . I would now l ike to argue that th is on to log ical approach to the

d ef in i t io n o f th e h u man sc ien ces p ro v id es Gad amer w i th a p o s i t io n th a t av o id s

so me o f th e cen t ra l c r i t i c i sms th a t h av e b een ra i sed ag a in s t th e Wi t tg en s te in ian

ap p ro ach . A wid e ran g e o f o b jec t io n s to Wi t tg en s te in ian so c ia l sc i en ce h av e

b een ad v an ced , b u t th ree b as ic l in es o f c r i t i c i sms can b e id en t i f i ed : f i r s t , t h e

imp l ic i t r e l a t iv ism an d n o m in a l i sm o f th e W i t tg en s te in ian ap p ro ach ; seco n d , th e

mo n ad ic ch ara c te r o f l an g u ag e g am e an a ly s i s ; an d , th i rd , t h e ah i s to r i ca l n a tu re o f

W i t tg en s te in ian an a ly s i s . I t can b e sh o wn wi th r eg ard to each o f th ese i s su es th a tG a d a m e r ' s o n t o l o g i c a l d e f i n i t i o n o f t h e h u m a n s c i e n c e s o f f e r s a r e f u t a t i o n o f

these cr i t ic i sms no t avai lab le to the Wit tgenste in ians .

Th e ch arg e th a t th e W i t tg en s te in ian ap p ro a ch to th e so c ia l sc ien ces r esu lt s in

t h e t o t a l r e l a t i v i s m o f s o c ia l s c i e n c e h a s b e e n m o s t v e h e m e n t l y a n d e l o -

q u en t ly s t a t ed b y E rn s t Ge l ln e r . Ge l ln e r d ec la res th a t fo r mo s t p h i lo so p h ers

re l a t iv i sm i s a p ro b lem, b u t fo r Wi t tg en s te in an d Win ch i t i s a so lu t io n (1 9 7 4 ,

p p . 1 9 -4 9 ) . H i s a rg u men t i s s imp ly th a t th e Wi t tg en s te in ian ap p ro ach i s u n -

avo idab ly re la t iv is t ic and thus an unaccep tab le bas is fo r inves t igat ion in theso c ia l sc i en ces . Th e n o m in a l i sm o f th e W i t tg en s te in ian ap p ro ach a l so d raws h i s

f ir e . A n a ly s i s in th e so c ial sc i en ces , h e c l a ims , can n o t b e l imi t ed to th e ex amin a-

t io n o f m e r e w o r d s . I t m u s t , o n t he c o n t ra r y , b e c o n c e m e d w i th t he r e a l i t y

o f so c ia l r e l a t io n s .

Th e Wi t tg en s te in ian s ' r ep ly to th ese ch arg es h as b een to a rg u e th e ep i s -

t emo lo g ica l p o in t th a t wo rd s fo rm th e b o u n d ary o f wh a t can b e in t e l l ig ib ly

d i s c u s se d a n d , t h u s , t o p o s i t a r e a l m o f r e a l i t y b e y o n d t h at w h i c h i s l in -



220 HEKMAN

gui s t i ca l l y cons t i t u t ed i s t o pos i t a r ea l i t y abou t w h i ch w e canno t speak . A nd ,

a l t h o u g h G a d a m e r w o u l d a g r e e w i t h t h i s a r g u m e n t , h i s o n t o l o g i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e

s u p p l i e s h i m w i th m o r e s u b s t a n t i v e a r g u m e n t s a g a i n s t th e c h a r g e s o f r e l a ti v i s m

a n d n o m i n a l i s m . F i r s t, a n d m o s t i m p o r t a n t l y , G a d a m e r a r g u e s th a t r e l a t iv i s m ,o r , in h i s w o r d s , p r e ju d i ce ', i s n o t a p r o b l e m o r b e s o l v e d , b u t i s, r a t h e r ,

t he o n t o l o g i c a l c o n d i t io n o f m a n i n t h e w o r l d . B y c l e a r l y r e v e a l i n g th e e r r o r o f

i d e nt if y in g o b j e c t i v e k n o w l e d g e w i th f r e e d o m f r o m p r e ju d i c e , G a d a m e r r e v e a l s

t h a t G e l l n e r ' s c r i t i c i s m i s f u n d a m e n t a l l y m i s c o n c e i v e d . H i s a p p r o a c h a l s o s u p -

p l ie s a r e f u ta t io n o f th e c h a r g e o f n o m i n a l i s m . F o r G a d a m e r l a n g u a g e is c e n t ra l

t o u n d e r s t a n d i n g b e c a u s e b e i n g i s r e v e a l e d i n l a n g u a g e . T h e c h a r g e t h a t t h e

h u m a n s c ie n c e s s tu d y m e r e w o r d s th u s b e c o m e s m e a n i n g l e ss b e c a u s e th e

s t udy o f l angu age i s the s t udy o f be i ng i ts e l f. 9T h e s e c o n d c r i t i c i s m , t h e c h a r g e t h a t W i t t g e n s t e i n s e e s l a n g u a g e g a m e s a s

m ona d i c en t i t ie s no t sub j ec t t o t r ans l a t ion , i s on e t ha t ha s f i gu red p r om i nen t l y in

H a b e r m a s ' w o r k , a n d c a n b e s t b e a p p r o a c h e d b y r e f e r r i n g t o h i s c o m p a r a t i v e

c r it iq u e o f W i t tg e n s te i n a n d G a d a m e r . H a b e r m a s a r g u e s t ha t G a d a m e r ' s p o s it io n

i s l e s s r e l a t i v i s t i c t h a n t h a t o f W i t t g e n s t e i n b e c a u s e G a d a m e r e m p h a s i z e s t h e

p o r o u s n e s s o f l an g u a g e g a m e s . W h il e G a d a m e r ' s h e r m e n eu t ic an a ly s is

f o c u s e s o n t h e m e d i a t i n g f u n c ti o n o f l a n g u a g e g a m e s , W i tt g e n s t e in , in c o n t ra s t ,

de f i nes l anguage gam es a s un t r ans l a t ab l e (1970 , pp . 252 f f ; A pe l 1980 , pp .2 3 - 3 3 ) . H a b e r m a s u s e s th i s c o n t r a s t b e t w e e n t h e t w o p o s i t io n s to a r g u e f o r t h e

s u p e r i o r it y o f G a d a m e r ' s v i e w . B u t a lt h o u g h H a b e r m a s h a s id e n t if ie d a v a li d

d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e p o s i t io n s o f G a d a m e r a n d W i t t g e n s te i n , h i s a r g u m e n t

m u s t b e c a r e f u l l y q u a l if i ed . A l t h o u g h p o i n t in g to t h e m o n a d i c c h a r a c t e r o f W i t t-

g e n s t e i n ' s l a n g u a g e g a m e s h a s b e c o m e a s t o c k c ri ti c is m o f h is a p p r o a c h ( G e l ln e r

1 9 7 4, p . 2 4 ; M a c l n t y r e 1 9 7 4 , p . 7 1 ; W e l l m e r 1 9 71 , p . 3 0 ) , it s h o u l d b e n o te d

t ha t t h is pos i t i on h as be en a t t ri bu t ed t o W i t tgens t e i n l a rge l y on t he bas i s o f h i s

s i l ence on th i s i ssue . N ow he re do es W i t tgens t e i n e xp l i c i t l y r e j ec t t he poss i b i l i tyo f tr a n s la t io n b e t w e e n l a n g u a g e g a m e s ; th e q u e s t io n s i m p l y n e v e r c o m e s u p .

A n d a l th o u g h in s o m e o f h is w o r k W i n c h s e e m s t o d e n y t h e p o s s ib i li ty o f

t r ans l a t i on be t w een l anguage gam es , h i s pos i t i on on t h i s i s sue i s l e s s t han

c l e a r . t ° G a d a m e r , o f c o u r s e , d e a l s e x p l ic i tl y w i t h th e p r o b l e m o f t ra n s la t io n

t h roughou t h i s w ork . The ana l ys i s o f how t r ans l a t i on o r i n t e rp re t a t i on occu r s i s ,

i n f ac t , t he co rne r s t on e o f h i s t heo ry o f he rm e neu t i c s . Bu t t he r ea son fo r h i s

i n t e re s t in t h is i s sue shou l d be c l ea r . H i s app roac h t o t he hum an sc i en ces em erg es

f ro m t he he rm eneu t i c t r ad i ti on o f the t r ans l a ti on o f tex t s ; h i s is , t hus , i n t i m a t e l yc o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e p r o b l e m s r a is e d b y t h is i s s u e. I t c a n b e a r g u e d , t h e n , t h a t th e

91n this G adam er sees his view in conflict with that o f W ittgenstein. He explicitly states that therelationship between being and language obv iates he nom inalism mp licit n W ittgenstein'sapproach(1976b, p. 75).

1°In his discussion of this issue H ackingm akes the po int that W inch doe s not derive his positionfrom that of W ittgenstein (1975 , p. 153).




d i f fe ren c e b e tw een G ad a m er an d W i t tg en s te in o n th is i s su e rep resen t s l es s an

ex p l i c i t co n t ras t b e twe en th e tw o p o s i t io n s th an a d i f fe ren ce in emp h as i s ro o ted

in th e d i f fe ren t t r ad i t io n s f ro m wh ich each p o s i t io n d e r iv es .

Mu ch th e s ame p o in t can b e mad e wi th reg ard to th e th i rd i s s u e , a l s o af req u en t ly n o ted d i f fe ren ce b e tween Gad amer an d Wi t tg en s te in : th e fac t th a t

G ad a m er , u n l ik e W i t tg en s te in , s t re s s es th e h i s to r ica l i ty o f lan g u a g e , a n d , co n s e -

q u en t ly , u n d ers tan d in g . H ab erm as , ag a in , m ak es mu ch o f th is d i f fe ren c e , p ra is -

in g G ad a m er fo r h i s d i a l ec t i c a l acco u n t o f t r ad it io n (1 9 7 0 , p p . 2 6 1 f f ). I t can

b e a rg u e d , h o w e v e r , t h a t th e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n G a d a m e r a n d W i tt g e ns t ei n o n

thi s is s u e h as b een ex ag g era ted . G ad a m er ' s em p h as i s o n th e h is to r ica l i ty o f

u n d ers tan d in g d o es , a s Hab ermas c la ims , ad d an imp o r tan t d imen s io n to l an -

g u ag e an a ly s i s . A l th o u g h th i s d imen s io n i s , s t r i c t ly s p eak in g , l ack in g in man yo rd in a ry l an g u ag e d i s cu s s io n s , i t is n o t b y an y me an s in co n f l i c t w i th th e b as ic

as s u mp t io n s o f th e ap p ro ach . W in ch an d Lo u c h h av e b een f req u en t ly c r i t ic i zed

fo r ad o p t in g an ah i s to r i ca l ap p ro ac h . Bu t th e wo rk o f o th e r s wh o s e p e r s p ec t iv e

can , b ro ad ly , b e d e f in ed as W i t tg en s te in ian s u g g es t s th a t a h is to ri ca l d imen s io n

is q u i t e co m p at ib le w i th W i t tg en s te in ian s o c ia l s c ien ce .l~ T h e d i f fe ren ce b e -

tween th e two ap p ro ach e s , o n c e m o re , i s o n e o f em p h as i s r a th e r th an in co m p at -

ib i l i ty .

My po in t wi th regard to the i s sues o f t rans la t ion and h is to r ica l i ty , thus , i stwo fo ld . F i r s t, I w i s h to emp h as ize th a t th e d i f fe ren ces b e tween th e two p o s it io n s

o n b o th i s s u es h as b een o v er ra ted . Seco n d ly , I wan t to s t r es s th a t Gad amer ' s

co n ce rn s w i th t r an s la t io n an d th e h i s to r i ca li ty o f u n d ers tan d in g rep res en t a s p ec t s

of h is approach that are par t icu lar ly wel lsu i ted to the necess i t ies o f socia l sc ien-

t if ic an a ly s i s. Th ey a l s o rep res en t , u n fo r tu n a te ly , a s p ec ts th a t h av e b een l a rg e ly

ig n o red b y Wi t tg en s te in ian s o c ia l s c ien t i s t s . Th e fac t th a t th e Wi t tg en s te in ian

ap p ro ach h as b een a ccu s e d o f ig n o r in g th es e i ss u es , fu r th e rm o re , h as s to o d in th e

way o f i t s accep tan ce as a v iab le meth o d o lo g y fo r th e s o c ia l s c ien ces .

C O N C L U S I O N

Th e fo reg o in g an a ly s i s e s t ab l is h es , th en , th a t G ad am er ' s tu rn to o n to lo g y o f fe r s

an ad v an tag e to th e s o c ia l s c ien ces b ecau s e i t o b v ia tes s o me o f th e cen t ra l

p ro b lems o f Wi t tg en s te in ian s o c ia l s c ien ce . Gad amer ' s p o s i t io n o n th e re l a t io n -

sh ip between the natu ra l and socia l sc iences , re la t iv ism, nominal ism, t rans la t ion ,

an d h i s to r i ca l i ty p ro v id es th e s o c ia l s c ien ces w i th a mo re v iab le ap p ro ach th anth at e s p o u s ed b y th e W i t tg en s te in ian s . In each cas e th e ad v a n tag e o f hi s p o s i t io n

is d ep e n d en t o n h i s m o v e to o n to lo g y . A l th o u g h G ad am er mak e s i t c l ea r th a t h is

mo v e to o n to lo g y i s cen t ra l to h i s ap p ro ach , b ecau s e h e i s n o t s p ec i f i ca l ly

co n c ern ed w i th th e s o c ia l s c ien ces o r m eth o d o lo g ica l q u es t io n s , h e d o es n o t o f fe r

an ex p l i c i t a rg u m en t fo r h i s o n to lo g ica l p o s it io n . H e re l ie s o n H e id eg g er ' s an a ly -

ill am thinking here particularly of J, G. A. Pocock(1971),



222 HEKMAN

s is o f t h e n e c e s s i ty o f o n t o l o g y r a t h e r t h a n d e v e l o p i n g h i s o w n p o s i ti o n . F o l l o w -

i n g H e i d e g g e r h i s p o s i t i o n i s s i m p l y t h a t o n t o l o g y p r e c e d e s e p i s t e m o l o g y . I n

Tru th and Method h i s p o s i t i o n i s s u p p o r t e d p r i m a r i l y b y a n a n a l y s i s o f t h e

c o n t e m p o r a r y p r o b l e m s o f th e h u m a n s c ie n c e s . G a d a m e r a r g u e s t ha t t he e m p h a -s i s on e p i s t e m ol o gy and t he r e j ec t ion o f on t o l og i ca l i s sues i n t he se d i sc ip l i nes i s

t h e c a u s e o f t h e i r c u r r e n t la c k o f d i re c ti o n . I n a c o m m e n t a r y o n G a d a m e r ' s w o r k ,

H w a Y o l J u n g e x p r e s s e s t h i s p o i n t v e r y s u c c i n c t l y . E p i s t e m o l o g y p r e s u p p o s e s

o n t o l o g y , J u n g a r g u es , b e c a u s e h o w t o k n o w h u m a n a c ti on m u s t b e b a s e d o n

w h a t h u m a n a c ti o n i s . T o d e n y t hi s r e su l ts in m e t h o d o l a t r y , t he w o r s h i p o f

m e t h o d t o th e e x c l u s io n o f s u b s ta n c e ( 1 9 7 9 , p . 5 9 ) .1 2

A l t h o u g h G a d a m e r ' s v i e w i s s ig n i f ic a n t i n th e s p e c i f i c s e n s e th a t it a v o i d s th e

p r o b l e m s i n c u m b e n t o n t h e W i t t g e n s t e i n i a n v i e w , h i s p o s i t i o n a l s o h a s w i d e ri m p l i c a t i o n s f o r c o n t e m p o r a r y s o c i a l t h e o r y . B y a v o i d i n g t h e r e l a t i v i s m , n o m i -

n a l is m , a n d a h i s t o r ic i s m o f t h e W i tt g e n s t e in i a n a p p r o a c h , G a d a m e r ' s p o s i ti o n

dem ons t r a t e s t ha t a l l an t i -pos i t i v i s t app roaches t o soc i a l s c i en t i f i c m e t hodo l ogy

d o n o t , a s s o m e c r i t i c s h a v e n o t e d , n e c e s s a r i l y e n c o u n t e r t h e s e p r o b l e m s .

G a d a m e r , u n l ik e H a b e r m a s a n d a n u m b e r o f o th e r a n t i- p o s i ti v is t c r it ic s i n th e

s o c ia l s c i e n c e s , d o e s n o t r e je c t t h e o b j e c t i v i s m o f p o s i ti v i s m o n l y to s e e k a n

abso l u t e founda t i on fo r t he soc i a l s c i ences i n ano t he r sphe re . Ra t he r , l i ke Wi t t -

g e n s t e i n , h e s e e k s t o d e v e l o p a n a p p r o a c h t h a t h a s a s it s t a sk t h e u n d e r s ta n d i n g o fh u m a n l if e a n d t h o u g h t , n o t t h e u n c o v e r i n g o f it s ab s o l u te f o u n d a t i o n s . I t s h o u l d

b e e m p h a s i z e d , t h e n , t h a t d e s p i t e t h e d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n G a d a m e r a n d W i t -

t g e n s te i n , t h e r e i s y e t a n i m p o r t a n t c o m m o n a l i t y b e t w e e n t h e m : a n t i fo u n d a -

t io n a l i s m , m3 I n c o n t r a s t t o H a b e r m a s , b o t h G a d a m e r a n d W i tt g e n s te i n r e j ec t n o t

on l y t he pos i t iv i s t app ro ach bu t , s pec i f i ca l l y , it s s ea rch fo r t he abso l u t e founda -

t io n s o f t h o u g h t . A l t h o u g h G a d a m e r ' s m o v e to o n t o l o g y a ll o w s h i m to a v o i d t he

ex t r e m e re l a t i v i sm o f t he Wi t t gens t e i n i an pos i t i on , i t i s neve r t he l e s s t he ca se t ha t

G a d a m e r , l ik e th e W i tt g e n s t e in i a n s , r e j e ct s th e H a b e r m a s i a n s e a r ch f o r a b s o l u te sa s t o t a l l y a b s u r d .

F i n a l l y , i t c a n b e a r g u e d t h a t t h is s ig n i f ic a n t c o m m o n a l i t y b e t w e e n G a d a m e r

and t he Wi t t gens t e i n i ans a l so ex t ends t o w ha t can be i den t i f i ed a s t he g rea t e s t

a d v a n t a g e o f G a d a m e r ' s a p p r o a c h : e s t a b l i s h in g t h e p r io r i ty o f th e h u m a n s c i -

ence s v i s - a -v i s t he na t u ra l s c i ences . Ev en t hough ne i t he r W i t tgens t e i n n o r h i s

f o l lo w e r s in t h e s o c ia l s c ie n c e s h a v e d e v e l o p e d s u c h a n a r g u m e n t , it c a n b e

a rgued t ha t t h i s pos i t i on i s i m p l i c i t i n Wi t t gens t e i n ' s app roach . The Philosophi

cal Investigations c a n b e i n t e r p re t e d a s o f f e r i n g a n e p i s te m o l o g i c a l a r g u m e n t f o rt he p r io r i ty o f o r d i n a r y l a n g u a g e u n d e r s t a n d i n g . K a r l - O t t o A p e l , in h is c o m m e n -

t a r y o n W i t t g e n s t e i n , a r g u e s t h a t W i t t g e n s t e i n o v e r c o m e s t h e m e t h o d o l o g i c a l

~2Anthony Gidd ens, in his treatment of this sa m e poin t, rather cavalierly dismisses G ada m er'sm ove to o ntology as mistaken because it falls prey to the 'fundamen tal erro r of existential pbe-nom enology that truth inheres in being (1976, p. 62).

tJOn this poin t see R orty (1979).



FROM EPISTEMOLOGY TO ONTOLOGY 3

s o l i p s i s m o f t h e T r a c t a t u s i n h i s l a te r p h i l o s o p h y b y a d o p t i n g t h e p o s i t i o n t ha t th e

u n d e r s t a n d i n g i m p l i c i t i n th e e v e r y d a y l a n g u a g e o f s o c i a l a c to r s i s th e a p r i o r i

c o n d i t i o n o f a l l h u m a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g ( 1 9 8 0 , p . 2 5 1 ) . I t f o l l o w s t h a t a l l s y s t e m s

o f t h o u g h t, i n c l u d i n g t h a t o f t h e n a tu r a l s c i e n c e s , m u s t p r e s u p p o s e t h is e v e r y d a yu n d e r s t a n d i n g , a n d h e n c e , t h a t t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r o f t h e h u m a n s c i e n c e s ( o r d i -

n a r y l a n g u a g e ) i s t h e g r o u n d o f th e n a t u r a l s c i e n c e s .

A l t h o u g h t hi s p o s i t io n c a n b e i m p u t e d t o W i t t g e n s t e i n , i ts i m p l i c a t i o n s h a v e

n o t b e e n d e v e l o p e d i n a n y c o h e r e n t w a y . A n d i t is in th i s r e g a r d t ha t G a d a m e r

o f fe r s a c l e a r a d v a n t a g e . H i s m o v e f r o m e p i s t e m o l o g y to o n t o l o g y a l l o w s h i m t o

o f f e r an e x p l i c i t a r g u m e n t f o r th e p r i o r i t y o f t h e s u b j e c t m a t t e r o f t h e h u m a n

s c i e n c e s . I n s o d o i n g h e r e s c u e s t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e s f r o m t h e i n f e r i o r p o s i t i o n to

w h i c h t h e y a r e r e l e g a t e d b y t h e p o s i t i v i s t p r o g r a m . T h i s i s n o m e a n f e a t , an dG a d a m e r ' s s u c c e s s i n t h i s r e g a r d s h o u l d i n s u r e t h a t h i s p o s i t i o n w i l l b e t a k e n

s e r i o u s l y b y t h e s o c i a l s c ie n c e s a n d h a v e a s i g n i f i c a n t i m p a c t o n c o n t e m p o r a r y

s o c i a l s c i e n t i f i c m e t h o d o l o g y .

R E F E R E N C E S

Apel, K. O. 1971. Hermeneutik und Ideologiekrit ik . Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.

Apel, K. O. 1977. The a priori of comm unication. In Understanding and social inquiry, eds. F.Dallmayr and T. M cCarthy. Notre Dame: Notre D am e University Press.

Ape l, K. O. 1980. Tow ards a trans format ion o f philosophy . London: RKP.

Apel, K . O . 1981. Herm eneutic philosophy o f understanding as a heuristic horizon for displaying

the problem -dimension of analytic philosophy of mea ning. Phi losop hy and Social Cr i ticism 7 ,

241-259.

Bauman, Z. 1978. Herm eneut ics a nd soc ia l sc ience . New York: Colum bia University Press.Bernstein, R. 1976. The restructuring o f social and po li t ica l theory . New Yo rk: Harcourt Brace

Jovanovich.

Bleicher, J. 1980. Contemporary hermeneutics . London: Routledge Kegan Paul.

Bub ner, R. 1975. Theory and practice in the light of h ermeneutic-criticist controversy. CulturalHermeneut ics 2 , 337-352.

Gadamer, H. 1971a. Replik. In Hermeneutik und Ideologiekrit ik , ed. K. O. Apel Frankfurt:Suhrkamp.

Gad amer, H . 1 97 1b . Rhetorik, H ermeneu tik und Ideologiekritik. In Hermeneutik und lde-

ologiekr i t ik ed. K . O. Apel. Frankfurt: Suhrkam p.

Gad amer, H. 1975, Truth a nd method. New York: The Seabu ry Press.

Gadamer, H. 1976b. Philosophical hermeneutics . Tr an s. and ed. D . E. Linge. Berkeley, CA :University of California Press.

Gadamer, H. 1976a. H ege l s d ia lec t ic : Five h ermene ut ic s tudies . Trans. P. C. Sm ith. New Hav en,

CT: Yale U niversity Press.Gadam er, H. 1979. The problem of historical consciousness. In Interp retive soc ial science, eds. P.

Rabinow and W . Sullivan. Berkeley, CA : University of California Press.

Giddens, A. 1976. Ne w rules o f soc io logical method. New Y ork: Basic Books.

Gunn ell, J. 1979. Po lit ical theory: Tra dit ion a nd interpretation. Cam bridge: W inthrop Publishers,Inc.

Hab ermas, J. 1970. Z u r L o g i k d e r S o z ia l w i s se n s c h a ft e n . Frankfurt: Suhrkam p.

Hack ing, I. 1975. Why does language mat ter to phi losophy? New Y ork: Cambridge UniversityPress.



224 HEKMAN

Hirsch, E. I967. Validity in interpretation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Hoy, D. C. 1978. The c rit ical circle: Litera ture and his tory in contemporary hermeneutics. Berke-

ley, CA: University of California Press.

Jung, H. Y. 1979.The cr is is o f pol i t ical unders tanding: A p henom enological perspec t ive in the

conduct o f pol i t ical inquiry . Pittsburg, PA: Duquesne University Press.

Loucb, A. 1966. Explanat ion and hunlan ac t ion . Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Maclntyre, A. 1976. Contexts of interpretation. Boston University Journal 24 41-46.

Maclntyre, A. 1974. Is understanding religion compatible with believing? In Rationality ed. B.

Wilson. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Gellner, E. 1974. Concepts and society. In Rat ional i ty ed. B. Wilson. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Misgeld, D. 1976. Critical theory and hermeneutics: The debate between Habermas and Gadamer.

In Critical Theory ed. J. O Neill. New York: Seabury Press.

Palmer, R. E. 1969. Hermeneutics: Interp retation theory in Schleiermacher~ Dilthey Heidegger

an d Gadamer . Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.Pitkin, H. 1972. Wittgenstein an d justi ce. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Pocock, J. 197I. Po lit ics language an d t ime. New York: Atheneum.

Roche, M. 1973. Phenomenology language an d the socia l sciences. London: Routledge and

Kegan Paul.

Rorty, R. 1979. Phi losophy and the mirror o f nature . Princeton. NJ: Princeton University Press.

Wellmer, Albrecht. 1976. Communications and emancipation: Reflections on the linguistic turn in

critical theory. In Cri t ical Theoo J. O Neill. New York: Seabury Press.

Wellmer, A. 1971. Critical theory of society . New York: Seabury.

Winch, P. 1958. The id ea o f a soc ial science a nd i ts relationship to philosophy. London: Routledge

and Kegau Paul.Wittgenstein, L. 1958. Ph ilosop hica l investigations. New York: Macmillan.

susan hekman from epistemology to ontology gadamer

Documents