The Contribution of Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher (1768-1834) To the development of Hermeneutics 



       Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher (1768 - 1834) SOSC 201 VINTERPRETIVE SOCIOLOGYV UESSAY 1U [CRAIG POVEY[
       Lecturer : Bob Tristram. Office: 83 Fairlie Terrace, Room 313. Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher B orn nov. 21, 1768 Breslau died feb. 12,
       1834 Berlin Philosopher, theologian, pastor. As both of Schleiermacher�s parents came from vicarages, it was hardly surprising that he took up
       theology, too, at first at the seminary of the Br�dergemeine in Barby (near Magdeburg), then at the university of Halle. He passed his exam in
       1790. Afterwards he worked as private tutor and curate. In 1796 he came to Berlin, where he met the leading personalities of the Berlin Romantic
       movement. A fter an unhappy love affair he left the city in 1802. In 1804 he became professor at the university of W�rzburg, before moving on to
       Halle in October. There he met Henrik Steffens, who became famous in 1813, when he incited his students to take to arms against Napoleon�s
       troops in the liberation wars. I n 1807 Schleiermacher returned to Berlin, where he had great influence in the founding of the Berlin University. In
       1809 he became pastor of the Dreifaltigkeits-Kirche (Trinity church), professor at the university in 1810, in 1818 finally rector. Since 1811 he was
       a member of the Akademie der Wissenschaften (Academy of Sciences). H e was very active in church politics, where he helped creating the
       Union of Protestant churches and worked towards a constitution of the synod. This put him into opposition to the government. Around 40,000
       people took part at his funeral. His grave is on Dreifaltigkeits-Friedhof (Trinity cemetery). Works: About Religion. Speeches for the Educated
       among its Critics. (1799) Secret Letters about Lucinde. (1800) Christian Faith, after the Principles of the Protestant Church. (1821-22)
       Information sourced from:([e-mail] 1997�) "Understanding...is grasping the point or meaning of what is being done or said. This
       is a notion far removed from the world of statistics and casual laws: it is closer to the realm of discourse and to the internal relations that link the
       parts of ...a discourse."[pg 115: Winch, The Idea of a Social Science and its Relation to Philosophy, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London,1958.]
       This is what hermeneutics is - understanding and the complexities behind this art form. Some would belief that hermeneutics itself is the art of
       understanding. In discussing Schleiermacher�s contribution to the development of hermeneutics, this essay will first attempt to define these
       complexities, the word hermeneutics, and understand how this art form has emerged. In understanding hermeneutics, one must also look at
       Schleiermacher, his theory itself and how he arose to create the first real set of rules for this kind of understanding - a framework.
       Schleiermacher�s theory was considered a radical break from tradition, one new aspect was his creation of a distinction between the speaker and
       the interpreter in his explanation of how hermeneutics worked. This radical side to Schleiermacher�s theory created some historical debates on the
       subject, a discussion of these debates will be used to highlight some of the problem areas in Schleiermacher�s work. However the main focus of
       this essay will be how Shleiermacher�s theory created a new approach to the concept of the process of understanding, and how various theorists
       have reacted to his works. Derived from the Greek words �hermenuein� (verb) meaning �to say�, �to explain�, or �to translate�, and the word
       �hermeneia�(noun) meaning �explain� or interpretation. [Holub, Robert. Selden Raman (Ed)1995�] One twentieth century philosopher Paul Rocher
       claims that hermeneutics can be traced back to Aristotle�s Peri hermeneias and in this classical work hermeneutics is a general theory of
       comprehension [Rocher, Paul 1974�]. However traditionally, hermeneutics has evolved from a methodology in dealing with the interpretation of
       text and exegesis to a complex and in depth science. Prior to the Romantic era hermeneutics was defined into three main areas of interest outlined
       by Robert Holub; Biblical exegesis which was primarily concerned with applying rules in dealing with the interpretation of the Old Testament and
       the Torah and can be associated with such writers as Augistine and Origenes. In biblical exegesis the hermeutic consisted of a literal interpretation
       of the text and focuses on a higher source or almost mystical approach to exegesis interpretation. This approach to hermeneutics was to be
       challenged by Protestant theorists (including Schleiermacher) whom believed that texts should not be associated with such mystical
       assumptions.[Holub, Robert. Selden, Raman (Ed)1995�] The second main area of interest was during the Renaissance period when there was an
       attempt to form a consistent interpretation to the code of Justinian (Ad 533). This secular life legal hermeneutic was used in carrying out justice
       from general laws where by judges have to interpret their meanings as they apply to specific instances. This form of interpretation is still used today
       in one form or another. [Holub, Robert. Seldon, Raman (Ed)1995�] The third area of interest I wish to introduce is that of philological
       hermeneutics. Originating from the Alexandrian School and focusing on the interpretation methodology of Homer. Philological hermeneutics was
       concerned with the authentic reconstruction of texts. This was instigated by a concern with the preservation and understanding of classical
       heritage.[Holub, Robert. Seldon, Raman (Ed)1995�]. The most influential period in the formation of modern hermeneutics was during the
       Romantic period (late eighteenth century to mid nineteenth century). This marked the beginning of new ideas and approaches to hermeneutics as
       theologians, philologists and philosophers began to question the methodology of classical theorists and their approach to interpreting texts and
       exegesis�s as new ideas began to arise. One influential philologist-theologian that emerged from this period was Friedrich Daniel Ernst
       Schleiermacher (1768-1834). Attributed as being �the founder of modern Protestant theology� and �the founder of modern hermeneutics�
       Schleiermacher�s interest in hermeneutics began with his associations with fellow romantic thinker Friedrich Schlegel. Schlegel was the first to
       apply principles of transcendental idealism to literature with his Philosophy of Philology.[Kurt Mueller-Vollmer 1986�]. This influenced
       Schleiermacher to embark upon a quest into the realm of hermeneutic theory. Schleiermacher�s theory represents the first true attempt to form a
       frame-work for understanding as a specific hermeneutic. Schleiermacher did this by critically uniting the hermeneutic traditions in Protestant
       theology and the rhetorical and philological traditions of classical scholarship with the new transcendental approach inherited from Kant and Fichte
       [Muller-Vollmer, Kurt (Ed) 1985�]. Schleiermacher`s theory focus�s on grammar and style and in keeping with his religious concern for themes
       and from this he created a general hermeneutics with principles independent of traditional interpretational principles [Shleiermacher, F. Kimmerle,
       H. (Ed) Winter, Carl. 1959�]. Schleiermacher achieved this by comparing the reader�s approach to a text with the contributions by both the
       author and reader in a dialogue to understand each other [Thompson, JB. (1981�] He depicted the dialogue in terms of a speaker (author) who
       puts together words to express his/her thoughts and a listener (reader) who can comprehend the words and sentences because they are drawn
       from the vocabulary of a shared language and follow its grammatical rules. The listener can also recognise the intentions behind the words by being
       in the same situation and sharing a common human nature with the speaker [[e-mail],1994�]. This theory forms the basis for the idea of
       Schleiermacher to �understand what is spoken� and this basis of understanding can be applied and modified to all texts as Palmer writes;
       Schleiermacher outlines in the opening of his lectures in 1819: "This art of understanding is in essence the same whether the text is a legal
       document, a religious Scripture, or a work of literature.......Each discipline develops theoretical tools for its particular problems, differences lie with
       the fundamental unity" Schleiermacher went on to clarify this theory in relation to all texts by stating: "The texts are in a language and thus grammar
       is used to find the meaning of a sentence; a general idea interacts with the grammatical structure to form the meaning, no matter what the type of
       document. If the principles of all understanding are formulated, these would comprise a general hermeneutics." [Palmer, Richard E. 1969�] This
       formulation of understanding outlined by Schleiermacher attempts to empathise with the speaker as well as analysing the language of the text in
       relation to the speaker (author). Schleiermacher�s interpretation of text is therefor, built upon (as outlined) understanding and has a grammatical, as
       well as a psychological moment. Schleiermacher�s theory of understanding places the text within a particular literature (or language) and in return
       uses the text to redefine the character of that literature. The psychological aspect of understanding enables the listener (reader) to reconstruct and
       understand the motives and assumptions within the text. Schleiermacher was the first to recognise this concept of �understanding what is spoken�
       as Palmer wrote: �Schleiermacher was the first to theorise this fundamental distinguishing of speaking and understanding and formed the basis for a
       new direction in hermeneutics in the theory of understanding.� He went on to say: "Take the act of understanding as its starting point then
       hermeneutics becomes the �art of understanding" [Palmer, Richard E. 1969�]. This theory for its time was viewed as rather radical and there were
       many opposing parties concerned with up holding the classical hermeneutic methodology which was viewed as �dogmatic� by Schleiermacher. One
       such opponent was Friedrich August Wolf as Palmer writes; "Friedrich August Wolf asserted that a different hermeneutic was needed for history,
       poetry, religious texts, and by extension for subvarieties within each classification". Palmer went on further to say; "Wolf viewed hermeneutics in a
       practical scene - A body of wisdom for meeting specific problems of interpretation. Tailored to a particular linguistic and historical difficulties
       posed by ancient texts in Hebrew, Greek and Latin." [Palmer, Richard 1969�] Wolf�s theory was in keeping with the norm of the time and is seen
       by Palmer as a theory purely to assist in the translation of ancient texts. Wolf�s theory was that general hermeneutics did not allow the use of
       specific methodology for a supposedly - privileged text such as the Bible. The only allowance made for a specific content consists in the variegated
       use made of the methods approved by the science of hermeneutics. [Bleicher, Josef 1980�] Schleiermacher�s theory opposed this as it seeks to
       specify specific interpretational methodology to all texts. The theory that one needs to understand what is spoken makes Schleiermacher�s
       hermeneutic revolutionary. Schleiermacher viewed the traditional hermeneutics that is based upon general reasoning as unacceptable. Palmer
       outlines this view; "Hermeneutics was held by Schleiermacher to be related to the concrete existing, acting human being in the process of
       understanding dialogue. When we start with the conditions that pertain to all dialogue, when then turn away form rationalism, metaphysics and
       morality and examine the concrete, actual situation involved in understanding, then we have hermeneutics a starting point for a viable hermeneutics
       that can serve as a core for special hermeneutics." [Palmer 1969�]. This is one of the main contributions by Schleiermacher in the development of
       hermeneutics, a new approach to the concept of the process of understanding. Understanding is now seen as Josef Bleicher writes; "as a process
       of creative reformulation and reconstruction. Based upon the two traditions followed by Schleiermacher of transcendental philosophy and
       romanticism, Schleiermacher used these traditions to derived a form of questioning the possibility of a valid interpretation." Josef Bleicher goes on
       to write; "This concept of questioning the possibility of a valid interpretation led Schleiermacher to the discovery of the hermeneutical law that
       every thought of the author has to be related to the unity of an active and organically developing subject". Bleicher went on to say; "This
       relationship between the individuality and the totality became the focal point of romanticist hermeneutics.[Bleicher, Josef 1980�] This systematic
       form of interpretation developed by Schleiermacher and outlined by Josef Bleicher contains two parts: The grammatical (outlined previously) and
       the psychological. With regards to the psychological aspect of interpretation Bleicher writes: "Schleiermacher�s development of a system for
       psychological interpretation center around the investigation of the emergence of thought from within the totality of an author�s life. The use of these
       hermeneutical rules allows for the understanding of the meaning of a given text." Bleicher went on further to outline a claim made by Schleiermacher
       that the benefit to hermeneutics of this new approach; "Given adequate historical and linguistic knowledge, the interpreter is in a position to
       understand the author better than he/she had understood him/herself." [Bleicher, Josef 1980�] One famous writer on this subject Hans-Georg
       Gadamer critically attributes Schleiermacher�s theory to the differentiation of understanding and misunderstanding, in which the interpretation is
       seen to begin this process of understanding within his or her own misunderstandings. [Gadamer, Hans-Georg 1989�] This critical analysis of
       Schleiermacher�s reciprocal approach is clarified by Chris Lang; "The interpreter brings into the text his or her own set of presuppositions which
       cause him or her to misunderstand the text. The hermeneutical method was intended to secure a right understanding of the text preconceived
       understandings or misunderstandings. Thus there is a recognition that the mind does not necessarily act as a mirror reflecting exactly what is in the
       text."[Lang, Chris. 19??�] On a more positive side Chris Lang viewed Schleiermacher�s method of validation as more sophisticated than his
       predecessors. From this perspective the discipline of hermeneutics gradually moves from a methodological approach to the text toward the
       modern conception that hermeneutics is what happens when we interpret a text or how one comes to understand.[Lang, Chris 19??�] Another
       major contribution by Schleiermacher to the development of hermeneutics was not actually made by Schleiermacher directly but by a student and
       avid follower of his work Whilhem Dilthey (1833-1911). Josef Bleicher addresses the importance of Schleiermacher�s methodology in relation to
       the work done by Dilthey; "In retrospect, Schleiermacher�s stature in the history of hermeneutics rests mainly on the impetus with which it had
       provided Dilthey�s thinking." Bleicher goes on to outline this impact on hermeneutics; "Within the span of fifty years hermeneutics developed from a
       system of interpretation relevant for theology and philology only into the methodology of a new science: Geisteswissenschaften. It claim to provide
       the precondition for all understanding shifted to the securing of �objectivity� in the methodical reconstructions of historical events - and to provide
       the foundation on which the positivist incursion into the territory of the mind and its manifestations could be repelled" [Bleicher, Josef 1980�]. The
       importance Dilthey�s Work following on from Schleiermacher is important in that Dilthey applied Schleiermacher�s hermeneutics to all texts.
       Dilthey actually set into practice the theory proposed by Schleiermacher. Dilthey went on to form the hermeneutic circle implementing
       Schleiermacher�s principle of understanding as a reconstructive process as [e-mail] writes; "In keeping with Schleiermacher�s
       hermeneutics.....Understanding (verstehen), the basis for methodological hermeneutics, involving a circle from texts to the author�s biography and
       immediate historical circumstances and back again.......Interpretation, or the systematic application of understanding to the text, reconstructs the
       world in which the text was produced and places the text in that world". [e-mail] went on further to outline the importance of this; "This
       circular process precludes and interpretation of a text being unique and scientifically objective, like the explanation of a chemical reaction, in as
       much as the knowledge of the author�s or agent�s world may itself critically depend upon the present interpretation." [[e-mail] 1994�]
       Here on can see Schleiermacher�s theory in the identification of understanding as empathy secured by the notion of a common human nature
       implemented by Dilthey. The importance of Dilthey�s work following on from Schleiermacher is important in the development of hermeneutics as
       [e-mail] writes; "Broadening Schleiermacher�s hermeneutics, Dilthey developed a philosophy of method for history and the human
       sciences that he believed could produce objective knowledge but avoid the reductionist, mechanistic, historical explanatory schema of the natural
       sciences......Dilthey argued that texts, verbal utterances, art and actions were meaningful expositions whose �mental contents� or intentions needed
       to be comprehended" [e-mail] went on to enforce Dilthy�s claim; "He claimed that investigating human interactions was more like
       interpreting a poem or discourse, than doing physics or chemistry experiments.....Dilthey termed the desired comprehension of events and
       expressions �understanding�(verstehen) and attempted to distinguish it from the explanatory knowledge (erkennen) generated by the
       hypothetico-deductive method of the natural sciences." [[e-mail] 1994�] The significance of Dilthey�s work in relation to
       Schleiermacher�s methodology is important in the overall contribution to hermeneutics because it is Dilthey whom uses Schleiermacher�s
       hermeneutics and sets out to apply it to all areas of interpretation. Also it is Dilthey�s attention to Schleiermacher�s hermeneutic methodology that
       ensured Schleiermacher place as one of the founders of modern hermeneutics. However the overall significance and contribution of
       Schleiermacher�s project of a general hermeneutics is best outlined by Richard Palmer; "Regardless of the psychologising element in the later
       Schleiermacher, his contribution to hermeneutics marks a turning point in its history. For hermeneutics is no longer seen as a specifically disciplinary
       matter belonging to theology, literature, or law; it is the art of understanding any utterances of language. [Palmer 1969�]. REFERENCES
       ___________________________________________________ Bleicher, Josef (1980�) �Contemporary Hermeneutics�. Published by
       Routledge & Kegan Paul. Pages: 14, 15, 16. Gadamer, Hans-Georg (1989�) �Truth And Method� 2nd Edition. Published by Crossroad
       Publishing US. Page: 185. Holub, Roberts & Selden, Raman (Ed) (1995�) �The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism�. Published by The
       Cambridge University Press. Pages 255, 256. Lang, Chris (19??�) �A Brief History Of Literary Theory II� Meaning; The movement from author
       to reader. Published by (Unknown) Page 1. Mueller-Vollmer, Kurt (1986�) �The Hermeneutics Reader�. Published by Basil Blackwell Ltd. Page
       72. [e-mail] (1994�) �The Methodological Hermeneutics of Schleiermacher and Dilthey�. Published by Nikos Drakos, Computer Based
       Learning Unit, University of Leeds. Palmer, Richard (1969�) �Hermeneutics�. Published by Northwestern University Press. Pages 85, 86, 94.
       Ricoeur, Paul (1974�) �The Conflict Between interpretations�. Published by Northwestern University Press. Page 4. Schleiermacher, Friedrich,
       Kummerle, H (Ed) & Winter, Carl.(1959�) �Hermeneutic�. Published by Universitatsverlag, Heidelburg. Thompson, JB (1981�) �Critical
       Hermeneutics� Published by Cambridge University Press. Page 37. 



Word Count: 2980