Situaciones relativas al matrimonio conexas con la libertad religiosa

In ancient mythology the messenger of the gods was Hermes, it was his

responsibility to interpret the gods wishes for man. The interpretation of text is as old as the written word and the first formal interpretation of text was undertaken as a religious task to interpret the word of God from the scrolls handed on by the prophets. However, this simple task was made complex by man, by culture, by context and by bias. As hermeneutics was a religious task therefore a religious example can demonstrate the problems with interpretation.

Abraham is an important religious figure in three major religions insomuch as the Jews, Moslems and Christians all worship the God of Abraham. To the Jews Abraham directed the course of their lives and their religious beliefs. To the Moslems Abraham was the father of Ishmael the father of Islam, finally he was a prophet laying the foundation for the Christian Messiah. The question still unanswered is – what was the influence of Abraham?

Aristotle used the term hermeneutics in his paper Peri Hermeneutics (loosely translated means On Interpretation). Aristotle used a logical approach to the

interpretation of the sentence based on its structure – this is not a simple grammatical interpretation as Aristotle believed that “words spoken are signs of the souls, written words are signs of the word” (Aristotle v 1; 1965:115). Aristotle did not recognise that the spoken word is an annotated expression of the mediation of thought and emotions. Words do not always reflect thought, this has been the issue for the expression of intuition. Words do not reflect the thoughts and emotion of the

experience. The Aristotelian method of hermeneutics is too limited and limiting for the study of intuition.

The practice of hermeneutics continued and the interpretations of early Christian writings were the responsibility of Christian scholars of whom many were canonised, adding support to their particular interpretations. Barrett (1996: 223) argued that the Christian church in the Middle Ages was forced to become hermeneutic to defend its doctrine against other philosophies that were gaining favour.

Hermeneutics emerged from this vague defensive position during the Renaissance. Three issues outside the church forced a change in direction. The first was the inability of the church to provide guidance for some and these individuals turned to the Ancients for introspections. Second and resulting from the first, an interest in Roman law (and with Aristotle’s grammatical interpretation) a new basis of jurisprudence was founded. Finally, and most importantly for this discussion, the philosophers of the time referred to as the enlightenment philosophers used an interpretive approach so that human knowledge could be organised (Barrett, 1996). Schleiermacher (1768-1834) wanted to redress the resultant imbalance of

hermeneutics in the eighteenth century. To seek understanding without reflection and to resort to the rules of understanding only in special cases is an imbalance

(Schleiermacher cited on Muller-Vollmer 1997:74). In other words to find a balanced understanding should be sought in all situations. A significant contribution of

Schleiermacher was that he was the first to consider the spoken work as text therefore paving the way to seek understanding from narratives.

Dilthey (1833-1911) moved forward from this point and appears to be the first to identify the cyclic nature of hermeneutics. He noted that the underlying

understanding, verstehen, (the basis for methodological hermeneutics) involved proceeding from the author’s biography and immediate historical circumstances to

the reconstruction of the world in which the text produced then has a place in that world. Gadamer later developed this concept and used to term historicity to describe the role of personal history in the hermeneutic circle.

Dilthey’s importance cannot be underestimated. His belief that the study of social science rests on erlebnis (lived experienced), verstehen (understanding), and expression. History, art and other social sciences express the spirit of the other and that such understanding involves our lived experience (Rickman, 1988)

If hermeneutics is viewed historically its focus shifts from religious to the secular which is reflective of social history as a whole. Initially hermeneutics was nearly exclusively confined to biblical exegesis however by the end of the nineteenth century and with the direction especially that provided by Fr. Schleiermacher and later by Dilthey, a modern general methodology for hermeneutics was intuited. Burnard (1998) explained the shift as one that moves from the pre-suppositions of some kind of universal empathy characteristic of nineteenth century romanticism to a more linguistically based notion of universal pragmatism found in twentieth century philosophers.

It was not until Heidegger made the philosophical connection between

phenomenology and hermeneutics that the paradigm moved fully into the life world. It is not clear if Heidegger was influenced by Dilthey but he did share

Schleiermacher’s concern that a person cannot understand a text without projecting oneself into the text. Heidegger’s ontological hermeneutics was a movement away from Husserl, Schleiermacher and Dilthey’s theory of interpretation to an existential theory of understanding. This understanding by its nature is incomplete because Dasein itself is both historical and finite.

Dasein; it is embedded in its context and fore-knowledge. A consequence of this no- longer-conscious knowledge is that interpretation is a conscious recognition of one’s own world – an existential understanding. Heidegger’s ontological hermeneutics therefore moves into a self conscious interpretative vantage (Heidegger, 1923). The study of intuition is somewhat supported by the nature of Heidegger’s hermeneutics in that fore-knowledge is accumulated over time and contains successive exercises of existential understanding and one that cannot escape its limitations of a self conscious interpretative stance, an existential accumulation over time of experience and a growth of fore-knowledge – practice development:

Heidegger describes the hermeneutic circle in such a way that understanding of the text remains permanently determined by the

anticipatory movement of fore-understandings. The circle as a whole and the part is not dissolved in perfect understanding but on the contrary is most fully realised. (Gadamer, 1975:261)

Idhe (2000) a contemporary phenomenologist acknowledges the impact of

Schleiermacher and Dilthey on hermeneutics. He says that Heidegger, Gadamer and Ricoeur are the three European giants of the hermeneutic tradition as they married hermeneutics with phenomenology (Idhe, 2000).

It can be argued that all knowledge is circular. Inductive research is a good example of this process. A scientist does not look for data and then come up with a premise, rather they develop a premise first then gather the evidence to support it. However, without some understanding the premise could not be developed. This cyclic nature of knowledge has an intuitive nature, an intuition for projection. Heidegger uses the word disclosure to describe this.

The world is disclosed to Dasein through ones emotions. A consequence of this is the hermeneutic circle. It is an error correcting cycle which increases understanding. The error correcting nature is found when the hypothesis is not supported. One returns to

the question and to the underlying pre-understandings that led to the question and a new hypothesis is developed to be tested. The uniqueness of each hermeneutic circle is the shared meanings held within the circle and as understanding grows so will knowledge.

The interpretive paradigm is not a problem for phenomenology as phenomenology requires that the world be subject to the hermeneutic circle. John Lye (2001) put forward the principles of phenomenological hermeneutics.

• We live in the world and meaning is related to our existence in the world. Our existence includes our prejudice (in the Gadamerian sense), our situation and abilities.

• We share reality through common signs

• Our symbolic world is not separate from our Being

• Experience is not just language, we are being-in-the-world

• There is a self presence before there is meaning

• Intentionality is at the heart of knowledge

• Consciousness is intentional

• Self understanding is a cultural act and culture is a personal act

• The hermeneutic circle does not close off but opens up because of symbolic and self destructive nature of our being

• The readers horizons meets the text’s horizons and is governed by the horizons at the time of writing.

( Brook University 3/ 4/2001)