8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/susan-hekman-from-epistemology-to-ontology-gadamer 1/20 HUMANSTUDIES6, 205-224 1983) From Epistemology to Ontology: Gadamer s Hermeneutics and Wittgensteinian Social Science* SUSAN HEKMAN Department of Political Science University of Texas at rlington In what has been characterized as the post-behaviorist or post-positivist era in political science and, more generally, throughout the social sciences, an increasing number of methodological approaches to the social sciences have been proposed as alternatives to the discredited positivist paradigm. The list of anti- positivist methodologies that have been advanced is by this time quite lengthy. It includes phenomenology, ordinary language analysis (or what has come to be known as Wittgensteinian social sciences ), structuralism, critical theory, and ethnomethodology, as well as several offshoots of these approaches. Also in- cluded in most of these lists of antipositivist approaches is that of hermeneutics. In recent years, in fact, interest in hermeneutics has enjoyed a revival of sorts. But the hermeneutics that is currently receiving attention among social and political theorists is quite different from the hermeneutics that Dilthey advocated as an alternative to positivist social science at the turn of the century. The hermeneutics referred to in contemporary discussion is most commonly the ap- proach rooted in the work of Hans-Georg Gadamer, an approach that represents a significant departure from traditional hermeneutics. And although the traditional hermeneutics of Dilthey and Schleiermacher have not received much attention in recent years, Gadamer's work has aroused new interest in hermeneutics because it raises a set of issues particularly relevant to contemporary discussions in the methodology of the social sciences. Gadamer's work has come to the attention of the social scientific community primarily as a result of the heated debate between Gadamer and Jiirgen Haber- mas, a debate that has been a staple of German intellectual life for many years. This debate has provided the context for the discussion of hermeneutics among the Anglo-American social scientists as well. 2 But although the Gadamer-Haber- *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
20
Embed
Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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).
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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 :
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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 :
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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 ).
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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.
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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.
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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.
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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.)
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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 -
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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).
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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),
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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).
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer
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.
8/13/2019 Susan Hekman From Epistemology to Ontology Gadamer