پدیده ­شناسی یا فنومنولوژی (به انگلیسی: Phenomenology) مکتب و روشی است که توسط ادموند هوسرل به هدف نظام‌بخشیدن به فلسفه و علوم انسانی پایه‌گذاری شده‌است. این مکتب به دنبال پژوهش و آگاهی مستقیم نسبت به تجربیات و مشاهدات، یا به عبارت دیگر نسبت به پدیدارهایی است که بی واسطه در تجربه ما ظاهر می‌شوند.

پدیده‌شناسی یکی از دو سنت بزرگ فلسفی سده بیستم است که با پیروان چون ماکس شلر، مارتین هایدگر، مرلوپونتی، سارتر، گادامرو پل ریکور فراسوی فلسفه در حوزه‌هایی چون جامعه‌شناسی، روان‌شناسی و دیگر علوم انسانی کاربرد دارد.

Wikipedia.com

 

 

 

هرمنوتیک

از ویکی‌پدیا، دانشنامهٔ آزاد.

پرش به: ناوبری, جستجو

هرمنوتیک (به انگلیسی: Hermeneutics) علم یا نظریهء تأویل است. علمی که مسئله فهم متون و چگونگی ادراک و فهم و روند آن را بررسی می­کند.

[ویرایش] ریشه شناسی

هرمنوتیک، از کلمه یونانی Hermeneuein به معنای باز کردن و تفسیر مشتق شده و ریشه اصلی آن هرمس است که در اساطیر یونانی اختراع زبان و خط را به او نسبت داده­اند.هرمس پیامهای اغلب رمزی خدایان را برای میرایان تأویل می کرد. هرمنوتیک از آغاز با تأویل متون مقدس می آغازد و با فقه الغه نزدیکی زیاد دارد. مجادلات جنبش اصلاح طلبی بر سر این حکم کلیسای کاتولیک که تنها این کلیسا صلاحیت تأویل کتاب مقدس را دارد، با پافشاری پروتستانها بر خود بسندگی متن مقدس، به نتیجه رسید. پیکرهء کلی نظریه و عمل حاصل از این مباحثات، هرمنوتیک را پی ریزی کرد.

تنظیم تدریجی این مواد و تبدیل آن به یک روش شناسی برای تأویل متن، در اواخر سدهء نوزدهم شکل نظریهء فلسفی عام تری را به خود گرفت.[۱]

این واژه در فارسی به صورت هرمونتیک و هرمنوتیک نیز نوشته می‌شود.

[ویرایش] هرمنیوتیک در ایران

دکترمحمد مجتهد شبستری یکی از اولین کسانی است که هرمنیوتیک را وارد گفتمان روشنفکری نمود و در زمینه فهم متون دینی، به کار گرفت. " هرمنوتیک ، کتاب و سنت " اثری از ایشان است.

 

 

 

Hermeneutics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Hermeneutics may be described as the development and study of theories of the interpretation and understanding of texts. In contemporary usage in religious studies, hermeneutics refers to the study of the interpretation of religious texts.

It is more broadly used in contemporary philosophy to denote the study of theories and methods of the interpretation of all texts and systems of meaning. The concept of "text" is here extended beyond written documents to any number of objects subject to interpretation, such as experiences. A hermeneutic is also defined as a specific system or method for interpretation, or a specific theory of interpretation. However, the contemporary philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer has said that hermeneutics is an approach rather than a method and, further, that the Hermeneutic circle is the central problem of interpretation.

Essentially, hermeneutics involves cultivating the ability to understand things from somebody else's point of view, and to appreciate the cultural and social forces that may have influenced their outlook. Hermeneutics is the process of applying this understanding to interpreting the meaning of written texts and symbolic artifacts (such as art or sculpture or architecture), which may be either historic or contemporary.

The meaning of hermeneutics and its range, depend strongly on the precision of definitions of such terms as: interpretation, understanding, point of view, and the choice of its domain of interest/(domain of intervention). On the other hand, as in the case of other abstract terms, definitions depend on the consensus of their users, and can evolve with time.

Hermeneutics interest includes also recognition and explanation of parables, metaphors and insinuations.

*        

[edit] A Basic Definition

In his book, "Hermeneutics", writer Henry A. Virkler provides this basic history and definition:

"The word hermeneutics is said to have had its origin in the name Hermes, the Greek god who served as messenger for the gods, transmitting and interpreting their communications to their fortunate, or often unfortunate, recipients."

"In its technical meaning, hermeneutics is often defined as the science and art of biblical interpretation. Hermeneutics is considered a science because it has rules and these rules can be classified into an orderly system. It is considered an art because communication is flexible, and therefore a mechanical and rigid application of rules will sometimes distort the true meaning of a communication.[1] To be a good interpreter one must learn the rules of hermeneutics as well as the art of applying those rules."

Hermeneutical theory is sometimes divided into two sub-categories--general and special hermeneutics. General hermeneutics is the study of those rules that govern interpretation of the entire biblical text. It includes topics of historical-cultural, contextual, lexical-syntactical, and theological analyses. Special hermeneutics is the study of those rules that apply to specific genres, such as parables, allegories, types, and prophecy."[2]

[edit] Etymology

The word hermeneutics is a term derived from the Greek word ἑρμηνεύω (hermeneuō, 'translate' or 'interpret'), and is uncertain origin.[3] It was introduced into philosophy mainly through the title of Aristotle's work Περὶ Ἑρμηνείας (Peri Hermeneias, 'On Interpretation', usually known today under its Latin title De Interpretatione). It is one of the earliest (c.360 BC) extant philosophical works in the Western tradition to deal with the relationship between language and logic in a comprehensive, explicit, and formal way. It is often suggested that the Greek word root is etymologically related to the name of the Greek mythological deity Hermes, which is also of uncertain origin[4], but cognate to a corrupted composite borrowing from Hebrew Har [ha]Emet (Emes) referring to the Biblical Mount Sinai where Moses interpreted the Jewish Law (known as haEmes - the Truth) to the people.[5]

[edit] History

In the last two millennia, the scope of hermeneutics has expanded to include the investigation and interpretation not only of oral, textual and artistic works, but of human behaviour generally, including language and patterns of speech, social institutions, and ritual behaviours (such as religious ceremonies, political rallies, football matches, rock concerts, etc.). Hermeneutics interprets or inquires into the meaning and import of these phenomena, through understanding the point of view and 'inner life' (Dilthey) of an insider, or the first-person perspective of an engaged participant in these phenomena.

[edit] Torah exegesis

Main articles: Biblical hermeneutics, Pesher, and Tafsir

Rabbinical Eras

*                   Zugot

*                   Tannaim

*                   Amoraim

*                   Savoraim

*                   Geonim

*                   Rishonim

*                   Acharonim

A common use of the word hermeneutics refers to a process of scriptural interpretation. Its earliest example is however found not in the written texts, but in the Jewish Oral Tradition dated to the Second Temple era (515 BCE - 70 CE) that later became the Talmud through its development of the Midrash.

Rabbi Ishmael of the Amoraic era of Judaism interpreted laws from the Torah through 13 hermeneutic principles, such as the a fortiori argument (known in Hebrew as קל וחומר (kal v'chomer)). This is the first appearance of hermeneutic rules in the World, through the exegetic interpretation of Biblical texts.[citation needed]

Traditional Jewish hermeneutics differ from the Greek method in that the rabbis considered the Tanakh (the Jewish bibilical canon) to be inviolate. They did not consider inconsistencies in the text to be mistakes or corruptions. These sections found to be problematic for Christian interpretation of the text, were believed to be deliberate, and containing meanings which had to be teased out of the text through the process of exegesis. As a result, the rabbinical interpreters created a secondary, esoteric reading of the text based on these sections.

This was one of the bases of early Kabbalah and the Gematria, which posited mystical or "secret" meanings to the Biblical text based on the letters of the text themselves and even their numerical value.[citation needed]

[edit] History of Western hermeneutics

Throughout religious history scholars and students of religious texts have sought to mine the wealth of their meanings by developing a variety of different systems of hermeneutics. Philosophical hermeneutics in particular can be seen as a development of scriptural hermeneutics, providing a theoretical backing for various interpretive projects. Thus, philosophical and scriptural hermeneutics can be seen as mutually reinforcing practices.

Hermeneutics in the Western world, as a general practice of text interpretation, can be traced back to Aristotle's work De Interpretatione (the Latin title by which it is usually known) or On Interpretation (Greek Περὶ Ἑρμηνείας or Peri Hermeneias) which came to fruition in Alexandria. Scholars in antiquity expected a text to be coherent, consistent in grammar, style and outlook, and they amended obscure or "decadent" readings to comply with their codified rules. By extending the perception of inherent logic of texts, Greeks were able to attribute works with uncertain origin.

[edit] Ancient Greece and Rome

Aristotle strikes a chord in his treatise De Interpretatione that reverberates through the intervening ages and supplies the key note for many contemporary theories of interpretation. His overture is here:

Words spoken are symbols or signs (symbola) of affections or impressions (pathemata) of the soul (psyche); written words are the signs of words spoken. As writing, so also is speech not the same for all races of men. But the mental affections themselves, of which these words are primarily signs (semeia), are the same for the whole of mankind, as are also the objects (pragmata) of which those affections are representations or likenesses, images, copies (homoiomata). (Aristotle, On Interpretation, 1.16a4.)

Equally important to later developments are texts on poetry, rhetoric, and sophistry, including many of Plato's dialogues, such as Cratylus, Ion, Gorgias, Lesser Hippias, and Republic, along with Aristotle's Poetics, Rhetoric, and On Sophistical Refutations. However, these texts deal more with the presentation and refutation of arguments, speeches and poems rather than the understanding of texts as texts. As Ramberg and Gjesdal note, "Only with the Stoics, and their reflections on the interpretation of myth, do we encounter something like a methodological awareness of the problems of textual understanding." [6]

Some ancient Greek philosophers, particularly Plato, tended to vilify poets and poetry as harmful nonsense—Plato denies entry to poets in his ideal state in The Republic until they can prove their value. In the Ion, Plato famously portrays poets as possessed:

You know, none of the epic poets, if they're good, are masters of their subject; they are inspired, possessed, and that is how they utter all those beautiful poems. The same goes for lyric poets if they're good: just as the Corybantes are not in their right minds when they dance, lyric poets, too, are not in their right minds when they make those beautiful lyrics, but as soon as they sail into harmony and rhythm they are possessed by Bacchic frenzy." (Plato, Ion, 533e-534a.)

The meaning of the poem thus becomes open to ridicule — whatever hints of the truth it may have, the truth is covered by madness. However, another line of thinking arose with Theagenes of Rhegium, who suggested that instead of taking poetry literally, what was expressed in poems were allegories of nature. Stoic philosophers further developed this idea, reading into the poets not only allegories of natural phenomena, but allegories of ethical behavior.

Aristotle differed with his predecessor, Plato, in the worth of poetry. Both saw art as an act of mimesis, but where Plato saw a pale, essentially false imitation in art of reality, Aristotle saw the possibility of truth in imitation. As critic David Richter points out, "for Aristotle, artists must disregard incidental facts to search for deeper universal truths"--instead of being essentially false, poetry may be universally true. (Richter, The Critical Tradition, 57.) In the Poetics, Aristotle called both the tragedy and the epic noble, with tragedy serving the essential function of purging strong emotions from the audience through katharsis.

[edit] Early Christian hermeneutics

The early Patristic traditions of Biblical exegesis have few unifying characteristics in the beginning but tend toward unification in schools of hermeneutical theory. The early Christian period of Biblical interpretation can be subdivided into the Apostolic and Sub-apostolic period (which dates from the writing of the New Testament to ca. 200) and the Antiochine/Alexandrian division (which spans from ca. 200 to the medieval period).

[edit] Apostolic and Sub-apostolic hermeneutics

The operative hermeneutical principle in the New Testament and earliest Church Fathers was prophecy fulfillment. The Gospels, particularly the Gospel of Matthew, make extensive use of the Old Testament for the purposes of demonstrating that Jesus was the Messiah. Examples include Matthew 1:23, 2:15-18, 3:3, 21:54, Mark 1:2-3, 4:12, Luke 3:6, 22:37, John 2:17, 12:15, and notably in Luke 4:18-21 and parallels where Jesus read extensively from Isaiah and makes the claim that the prophecy is fulfilled in the crowds hearing it. The Pauline epistles employ the same principle, as evidenced by 1 Corinthians 1:19 and Ephesians 4:8-10, as does Hebrews (see 8:7-13).

The principle is carried over into the sub-apostolic age as well and through the second century. For example, Irenaeus dedicates an entire chapter in Against Heresies to the defense of Isaiah 7:14, one of the chief prophecies used to validate Jesus as the Messiah.[7] This is consistent with Irenaeus' general usage. More so than even he, though, the second centuryapologists tended to interpret and utilize most scripture as being primarily for the purpose of showing prophecy fulfillment. Important among these was Justin Martyr, who made extensive use of scripture to this end. Examples of this usage may be seen in his Apology in which chapters 31-53 are specifically dedicated to proving Christ through prophecy. He uses scripture similarly in Dialogue with Trypho.

And when Herod succeeded Archelaus, having received the authority which had been allotted to him, Pilate sent to him by way of compliment Jesus bound; and God foreknowing that this would happen, had thus spoken: ‘And they brought Him to the Assyrian, a present to the king.’[8]

Here Justin demonstrates that prophecy fulfillment supersedes logical context in hermeneutics. He ignores the christological issues that arise from equating Jesus to the calf idol of Bethel which is the "him" being brought to the king in Hosea 10:6.

It is likely that the high view of prophecy fulfillment is a product of the circumstance of the early church. The primary goal of early authors was a defense of Christianity against attacks from paganism and Judaism as well as suppressing what were considered schismatic or heretical groups. To this end, Martin Jan Mulder suggests that prophecy fulfillment was the primary hermeneutical method because Roman society had a high view of both antiquity and oracles. [9] By using the Old Testament to validate Jesus, early Christians sought to tap into both the oracles of the prophets and the antiquity of the Jewish scriptures.

[edit] The Schools of Alexandria and Antioch

Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.

Beginning as early as the third century, Christian hermeneutics began to split into two primary schools: Alexandria and Antioch. The Alexandrian Biblical interpretations stressed allegorical readings, frequently at the expense of the texts' literal meaning. Primary figures in this school included Origen and Clement of Alexandria. The Antiochine school stressed instead the more literal and historical meaning of the text. Theodore of Mopsuestia and Diodore of Tarsus were the primary figures in the Antiochine school.

[edit] Medieval hermeneutics

Medieval Christian interpretations of text incorporated exegesis into a fourfold mode that emphasized the distinction between the letter and the spirit of the text. This schema was based on the various ways of interpreting the text utilitized by the Patristic writers. The literal sense (sensus historicus) of Scripture denotes what the text states or reports directly. The allegorical sense (sensus allegoricus) explains the text with regard to the doctrinal content of church dogma, so that each literal element has a symbolic meaning, see also Typology (theology). The moral application of the text to the individual reader or hearer is the third sense, the sensus tropologicus or sensus moralis, while a fourth level of meaning, the sensus anagogicus, draws out of the text the implicit allusions it contains to secret metaphysical and eschatological knowledge, or gnosis.

The hermeneutical terminology used here is in part arbitrary. For almost all three interpretations which go beyond the literal explanations are in a general sense "allegorical". The practical application of these three aspects of spiritual interpretation varied considerably. Most of the time, the fourfold sense of the Scriptures was used only partially, dependent upon the content of the text and the idea of the exegete.... We can easily notice that the basic structure is in fact a twofold sense of the Scriptures, that is, the distinction between the sensus literalis and the sensus spiritualis or mysticus, and that the number four was derived from a restrictive systematization of the numerous possibilities which existed for the sensus spiritualis into three interpretive dimensions. [10]

Hermeneutics in the Middle Ages witnessed the proliferation of non-literal interpretations of the Bible. Christian commentators could read Old Testament narratives simultaneously as prefigurations of analogous New Testament episodes, as symbolic lessons about Church institutions and current teachings, and as personally applicable allegories of the Spirit. In each case, the meaning of the signs was constrained by imputing a particular intention to the Bible, such as teaching morality, but these interpretive bases were posited by the religious tradition rather than suggested by a preliminary reading of the text.

The customary medieval exegetical technique commented on the text in glossae ("glosses" or annotations) written between the lines and at the side of the text which was left with wide margins for this very purpose. The text might be further commented on in scholia which are long, exegetical passages, often on a separate page.

A similar fourfold categorization is also found in Rabbinic writings. The fourfold categorizations are: Peshat (simple interpretation), Remez (allusion), Derash (interpretive), and Sod (secret/mystical). It is uncertain whether or not the Rabbinic division of interpretation pre-dates the Patristic version. The medieval period saw the growth of many new categories of Rabbinic interpretation and explanation of the Torah, including the emergence of Kabbalah and the writings of Maimonides.

[edit] Renaissance and Enlightenment

Please help improve this section by expanding it.
Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion.

The discipline of hermeneutics emerged with the new humanist education of the 15th century as a historical and critical methodology for analyzing texts. In a triumph of early modern hermeneutics, the Italian humanist Lorenzo Valla proved in 1440 that the "Donation of Constantine" was a forgery, through intrinsic evidence of the text itself. Thus hermeneutics expanded from its medieval role explaining the correct analysis of the Bible.

However, Biblical hermeneutics did not die off. For example, the Protestant Reformation brought about a renewed interest in the interpretation of the Bible, which took a step away from the interpretive tradition developed during the Middle Ages back to the texts themselves.

The rationalist Enlightenment led hermeneuts, especially Protestant exegetes, to view Scriptural texts as secular Classical texts were viewed. Scripture thus was interpreted as responses to historical or social forces, so that apparent contradictions and difficult passages in the New Testament, for example, might be clarified by comparing their possible meanings with contemporaneous Christian practices.