Knowledge, hermeneutics, and history
Tom Rockmore
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01250445
1992-01-01
Continental Philosophy Review
Abstract:This paper addresses some of the tensions arising out of recent discussion about hermeneutics, primarily in the philosophical domain. There is more than one possible reading of "hermeneutics." For present purposes, I will understand "hermeneutics" to mean "interpretation, particularly interpretation of texts." I am particularly concerned with the link between interpretation, knowledge in the traditional sense, and history. The thesis I want to push in this context is that there is a tension which has emerged. If one recognizes that epistemology has a hermeneutical element, then it is inconsistent to acknowledge anything like the recovery of theory of knowledge in the traditional sense, roughly a normative idea of knowledge as revealing in some ultimate way the way things are, say, the structure of reality in the most general sense. I take it that, whatever it once was, hermeneutics has tended to assume a clearly epistemological role at least since Heidegger, certainly since Gadamer. In my view, this kind of move is partially justified, since the failure of traditional strategies for knowledge in the strong, or traditional, sense, most prominently foundationalism in all its forms, indicates that interpretation is unavoidable. The problem, then, is the way in which theory of knowledge can be recovered from a hermeneutical stance. Now it is noteworthy that the reaction to Gadamer in this discussion has seen the epistemological thrust of his hermeneutical position and reacted accordingly. It has rejected his own claims for knowledge for which it has substituted other ways to achieve objectivity within the hermeneutical perspective. Yet the effort to recover the knowledge within the hermeneutic discussion becomes problematic when it aims at knowledge in the traditional sense. For the hermeneutic strategy is too weak to support this conclusion. My point is that the traditional idea of knowledge with which philosophy has been concerned roughly since Plato, as late as Husserl, perhaps even in Heidegger on some readings, cannot follow from interpretation, since it requires a stronger basis, for instance a foundation in some