What Kind of Problem is the Hermeneutic Circle?

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511812880.023

10 - What Kind of Problem is the Hermeneutic Circle?

The Situationist Attack on Virtue Theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 June 2012

C. Mantzavinos

Edited by

C. Mantzavinos

Show author details

C. Mantzavinos: Affiliation:
Witten/Herdecke University Chair of Economics and Philosophy
C. Mantzavinos: Affiliation:
Witten/Herdecke University

Book contents

Get access

Summary

The hermeneutic circle serves as a standard argument for all those who raise a claim to the autonomy of the human sciences. The proponents of an alternative methodology for the human sciences present the hermeneutic circle either as an ontological problem or as a specific methodological problem in the social sciences and the humanities. One of the most influential defenders of interpretivism in the English-speaking world, Charles Taylor, contends for example (1985: 18):

This is one way of trying to express what has been called the “hermeneutical circle.” What we are trying to establish is a certain reading of text or expressions, and what we appeal to as our grounds for this reading can only be other readings. The circle can also be put in terms of part-whole relations: we are trying to establish a reading for the whole text, and for this we appeal to readings of its partial expressions; and yet because we are dealing with meaning, with making sense, where expressions only make sense or not in relation to others, the readings of partial expressions depend on those of others, and ultimately of the whole.

Our understanding of a society is supposed to be circular in an analogous way: we can only understand, for example, some part of a political process only if we have some understanding of the whole, but we can only understand the whole, if we have already understood the part. In this chapter I would like to check the soundness of this argument.

Type: Chapter
Information: Philosophy of the Social Sciences
Philosophical Theory and Scientific Practice
, pp. 299 - 311

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511812880.023 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, J. R. 2005. Cognitive Psychology and Its Implications. 6th edn. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and Company.Google Scholar PubMed

Albert, H. 1994. Kritik der reinen Hermeneutik. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).Google Scholar

Ast, G. A. F. 1808. Grundlinien der Grammatik, Hermeneutik und Kritik. Landshut: Jos. Thomann, Buchdrucker und Buchhändler.Google Scholar

Baron, J. 1994. Thinking and Deciding. 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cohen, N. and Squire, L. R. 1980. “Preserved learning and retention of pattern-analyzing skill in amnesia: dissociation of knowing how and knowing that,” Science 210: 207–210.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Danks, J. H., Bohn, L., and Fears, R. 1983. “Comprehension Processes in Oral Reading.” In dʹArcais, G. B. Flores and Jarvella, R. J. (eds.) The Process of Language Understanding. Chichester, New York: John Wiley & Sons, pp. 193–223.Google Scholar

Føllesdal, D., Walløe, L., and Elster, J. 1996. Argumentasjonsteori, språk og vitenskapsfilosofi. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar

Gadamer, H.-G. 1959/1988. “On the Circle of Understanding.” In Connolly, J. M. and Keutner, T. (eds.) Hermeneutics versus Science? Three German Views. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, pp. 68–78. Originally published as “Vom Zirkel des Verstehens.” In Pfullingen, G. Neske (ed.) Festschrift für Martin Heidegger zum 70. Geburtstag, pp. 24–35.Google Scholar

Gadamer, H.-G. 1960/2003. Truth and Method. 2nd rev. edn, trans. Weinsheimer, J. and Marshall, D. G.. New York: Continuum. Originally published as Wahrheit und Methode. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck).Google Scholar

Goettner, H. 1973. Logik der Interpretation. Munich: Wilhelm Fink.Google Scholar

Heidegger, M. 1927/1962. Being and Time trans. Macquarrie, J. and Robinson, E.. New York, NY: Harper & Row. Originally published as Sein und ZeitTübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar

Just, M. A. and Carpenter, P. A. 1980. “A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension,” Psychological Review 87: 329–354.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Kincaid, H. 1996. Philosophical Foundations of the Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Little, D. 1991. Varieties of Social Explanation. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar

Manicas, P. 2006. A Realist Philosophy of Social Science. Explanation and Understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Mantzavinos, C. 2005. Naturalistic Hermeneutics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Martin, M. 1994. “Taylor on Interpretation and the Sciences of Man.” In Martin, M. and McIntyre, L. C. (eds.) Readings in the Philosophy of Social Science. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 259–279.Google Scholar

Pinker, S. 1994. The Language Instinct. New York, NY: Perennial Classics.CrossRef Google Scholar

Quine, , Orman, W. 1980. From A Logical Point of View. 2nd rev. edn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Reale, G. 2000. “Gadamer, ein großer Platoniker des 20. Jahrhunderts.” In Figal, G. (ed.) Begegnungen mit Hans-Georg Gadamer. Stuttgart: Reclam, pp. 92–104.Google Scholar

Schleiermacher, F. D. E. 1999. Hermeneutik und Kritik. Frank, M. (ed.). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 7th edn.Google Scholar

Searle, J. 1995. The Construction of Social Reality. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar

Searle, J. 2005. “What is an institution?,” Journal of Institutional Economics 1: 1–22.CrossRef Google Scholar

Simon, H. 1979. Models of Thought. New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Simon, H. 1983. Reason in Human Affairs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Simon, H. 1986. “The information processing explanation of gestalt phenomena,” Computers in Human Behavior 2: 241–255.CrossRef Google Scholar

Stegmüller, W. 1979/1988. “Walther von der Vogelweide's Lyric of Dream-Love and Quasar 3C 273. Reflections on the So-called ‘Circle of Understanding’ and on the So-called ‘Theory-Ladenness’ of Observations.” In Connolly, J. M. and Keutner, T. (eds.) Hermeneutics versus Science? Three German Views. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, pp. 102–152. Originally published as “Walther von der Vogelweides Lied von der Traumliebe und Quasar 3C 273. Betrachtungen zum sogenannten Zirkel des Verstehens und zur sogenannten Theorienbeladenheit der Beobachtungen.” In Rationale Rekonstruktion von Wissenschaft und ihrem Wandel. Stuttgart: Reclam 1979, pp. 27–86.Google Scholar

Stroop, H. R. 1935. “Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions,” Journal of Experimental Psychology 18: 643–662.CrossRef Google Scholar

Taylor, C. 1985. “Interpretation and the Sciences of Man.” In Philosophical Papers, vol. 2: Philosophy and the Human Sciences, Cambridge University Press, pp. 15–57.Google Scholar

Book contents

10 - What Kind of Problem is the Hermeneutic Circle?

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive