Truth and Criticism: Two Different Faces of the Hermeneutic Task

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to examine two different hermeneutic voices of Hans-Georg Gadamer and Jürgen Habermas and then to reveal a constructive task of hermeneutic activities in the interpretation of texts, social events, and the past history. Each thinker has his own methodology in appreciating the role of hermeneutics. Gadamer seeks to reveal the ontological condition from which understanding arises, while Habermas establishes a self-reflective structure of discourses that functions as a foundation of a critical theory for ideologies. Contrasting discords incompatibly lying on the differences between the two thinkers, this paper exposes the potential productivity of constant dialogues of the two differently oriented hermeneutics, whose interest is basically in the participation in tradition in Gadamer’s case and the reflective criticism of institutionalized ideas in Habermas’ case. Specifically, this paper focuses on the historical debates that took place in 1967 through 1971. During this relatively short period, there was a permanent legacy out of the debate for those who attempted to envision an inclusive and comprehensive hermeneutics like Paul Ricoeur. However, the primary concern of this paper needs to be confined to examine the legacy, not as sufficient ideas, but as necessary elements for our contemporary hermeneutic activities. First of all, this paper observes the basic ideas of each thinker for the preparation of following discussions. Then, a dialogue proceeds under the two headings, “Authoritative Tradition and Criticism of Ideology” and “Hermeneutic Claim to Universality: Liguisticality.” After showing the different voices of both thinkers and alluding a possible complementarity to each other, the paper concludes with a brief evaluation of both.