فهرست مطالب mohamad reza aram

Hermeneutics has been defined as "interpreting". Hermeneutics has faced many differences and conflicts in its tumultuous history, and the views of theorists on the mission of hermeneutics and its realm have varied widely. One of the most controversial issues in hermeneutics, which has even led to a fundamental shift in hermeneutic issues, was the ontological view of understanding, as regarded by Heidegger and Gadamer. They did not know the truth, as in previous periods, through the presentation of methods can be achieved. Philosophical hermeneutics believed in subjectivism; Prior to the emergence of this view, hermeneutics such as Schleiermacher and Delta sought to find a way to understand and to understand the correctly in terms of author and objectivity will be possible. Although ontological approach to the understanding of discourse are considered by many of twenty century philosophers, It also has been faced the criticism. Emilio Betty Warrick Hirsch defended objectivism in understanding texts with a critical and methodological view of understanding. This methodological approach is called methodological hermeneutics and the ontological approach is called philosophical hermeneutics. In this article, we try to explain the objectivist methodological hermeneutics through a library method and, referring to Heidegger and Gadamer's views, address the most important critiques of Hirsch in the subjective approach of philosophical hermeneutics.