Translator: Zahra. Kalaa
The first classification: historical classification:
First: nameless hermeneutic:Hermeneutic started formally before the seventeenth century. In this era, there were thoughts that were not presented as hermeneutic formally, but they had the themes of hermeneutic. In other words, they were in line with the tendencies of hermeneutic. Of course, we can classify nameless era in two parts:
A. Legendry hermeneutic:The legendry hermeneutic was the full of the legendry thoughts and they were used for the understanding of left works from old eras and were called '' hermeneutic Aghdam'' or '' legendry''.
B. The hermeneutic of Ghodsi:This era lasted years after Renaissance Era and hermeneutic became religious and was welcomed by Jewish and Christian scientists in order to interpret holy texts although there was no name of the science of hermeneutic. For example, the scientists of this era presented the matters of hermeneutic of a holy book without mentioning the name of hermeneutic.
Hermeneutic promoted as a formal branch of science from the seventeenth century. There were ideas and thoughts before this era and after this era and they were not presented with the formal name of hermeneutic, but they had the content of hermeneutic. These kinds of thoughts and point of views are interpreted as '' nameless hermeneutic''.
The purpose from the content of hermeneutic is that they have been in line with the tendencies of hermeneutic. For example, if an intellectual person believes that the understandings of human are interpretative, he or she has approached the point of view of philosophical hermeneutic of Hidger and Gadamer. Hence, he or she has expressed the idea of hermeneutic even though they have not expressed the name of hermeneutic among his or her works.
Most of new courses deal with such matters that in old eras, before these courses were formed and organized and its topics and the general framework of its matters were confirmed, some topics and matters of that course were discussed in the words of other intellectuals sporadically. For example, we can refer to the philosophy of morality whose root comes back to an independent course and a branch of philosophy in the twentieth century. The analysis of moral conceptions such as ''good or bad'' and '' should not ad should'' forms a part of the matters of the philosophy of morality. Most of talkers and philosophers have analyzed the conception '' good and ugly'' without naming them the philosophy of morality.
At the beginning of the seventeenth century, Dan Haver (654) named his book the Hermeneutic of Godsi or the way of the interpretation of holy books.
Second: modern hermeneutic (classic and methodological):
Shalayer Makher (1768-1834) is commonly known as the founder of modern hermeneutic. In this era, hermeneutic was presented in the form of a science or an art of the understanding of any kinds of texts through the appearance of the new kind of rationality. Basically, its purpose was to present the ways of avoiding misunderstanding and achieving the purpose of an author as the basic meaning of the text. This era is called methodological hermeneutic, classic hermeneutic and romantic hermeneutic because of high cooperation of romanticisms in its growth.
The most important hermeneutic point of views of Shalayer Makher include:
1. Shalayer Makher mentioned the matter of the understanding and the interpretation of the text as the matters of hermeneutics. Before him, hermeneutic was only a technique and logic to understand, to interpret and to remove the ambiguities of the text and they never discussed about the nature of its understanding and its obstacles.
Shalayer Makher considered understanding and interpretation as '' reconstruction'' and '' reproduction''. When an artist tries to understand an artistic work, he or she has done historical reconstruction and tries to penetrate into the mind of the creator of the work so that he or she can understand its meanings. In other words, to understand a work, we should get familiar with the mind of its creator. A historical reconstruction includes some elements. An interpreter should establish and reproduce a main situation that an artist has in his or her mind and feels the mind that a work belongs to.
This is true about the interpretation of a text. An interpreter will understand a text if he or she discovers the first and main process of the mind of an author and understands the atmosphere of the mind of an author that produces a text.
Before Shalayer Makher, the understanding and the interpretation of the text was seeing a text and its ambiguities whereas Shalayer Makher considered the understanding of a text the recognition of the mind of an author and the penetration of the world of his or her mind through reconstruction or the understanding of the individuality of an author.
2. The specific interpretation of Shalayer Makher from the nature of understanding and interpretation changes the mission and the duty of hermeneutics. The mission of hermeneutic was to remove ambiguities and the understanding of the text was its interpretation and the interpretation of the text was practical. Since then, the mission of hermeneutic was situational and it was used in order to remove ambiguities.
The specific point of view of Shalayer Makher understanding a text and an art work developed the mission of hermeneutics and changed it from a minor situation to a general situation because the understanding of a work was the understanding of the individuality of its creator and the reconstruction of the world of his or her mind in the time of the creation of a work. Hence, each understanding involves the understanding of individuality and if we define hermeneutic as the art, means and interpretation of understanding a work, hermeneutic gains a general mission because hermeneutic will be the means and art of understanding a text that is difficult. Hence, we should find the secret of generality of hermeneutic of Shalayer Makher in his specific interpretation from understanding that is the understanding of individuality.
3. Shalayer Makher developed the area of hermeneutic from the aspect of quantity. In his opinion, Hermeneutic does not belong only to religious texts, but it also includes any kinds of texts, even unfamiliar and translated texts. Moreover, hermeneutic includes written language as well as oral language because there is a basic difference between the understanding a text and the understanding of the remark of a person.
The point of view of Shalayer Makher, hermeneutic includes written texts as well as talking and oral remarks, was welcomed by Diltay Rar. Diltay Rar extended the realm of hermeneutic toward humanities.
4. Talking and writing are considered as an art and are presented within the framework of art. A talker or a writer fosters a feeling or a meaning in his or her mind and presents them in the form of oral or written statements. This presentation is not a mechanic action and the reflection of the thought and the feeling of mind, but meanings and feelings wear the garments of pronunciations and words through art and a talent. The meanings of expression, the technique of saying poems, and literary talent are glorious garments that decorate talks and writings.
The understanding and the interpretation of talks and writings pass the opposite path of talking and writing. To understand something, at first, we deal with writings and talks and try to understand mind, meanings and feelings that have created statements. Hence, the mind of a talker or a writer in words and sentences is not a mechanic action, but it is an art. The understanding of meanings and statements are not gained through literary regulations and they need talents and art. Hermeneutic is an art that is used to understand writings and talks. Entering the mind of the creator of a work and the understanding of his or her individuality need the art of hermeneutic.
5. Shalayer Makher considers understanding'' the understanding of the individuality of another person because there is not a close relationship between you and I and individuality is different from a person to the other person. However, there are common talents, feelings and experiences among persons. It seems that each person has some talents, feelings and experiences of another person. Hence, understanding another person is not impossible.
Misunderstanding always exists and we do not understand the individuality of an author and the creator of a work. Shalayer Makher paid special attention to this matter and considered the basic pivot of the matters of his hermeneutic some ways for avoiding misunderstanding.
6. One of important points in the thought of Shalayer Makher is paying attention to lack of the efficiency of the grammar of a language for the understanding and the interpretation of a text. Before Shalayer Makher, the mission of hermeneutic was to do technical duty and the depiction of literary regulations for achieving this understanding. Kladnius had understood this point well that whatever was in the mind of an author might be more than meanings that are extracted from the sentences of a text, but he did not consider the mission of hermeneutic the understanding of these meanings whereas Shalayer Makher considered the mission of hermeneutic the understanding of the individuality of an author. Hence, he paid special attention to these meanings that were out of control of regulations of grammar.
Lack of the efficiency of the interpretation related to linguistic and grammatical regulations had Shalayer Makher consider complete understanding in two matters: 1. the grammatical interpretation relies on literary regulations and deals with interpretative text and forms. 2. Technical and psychological interpretation tries to understand the individuality of an author and his or her mind. Writing and talking has two stages, whatever is in mind and whatever is expressed in statements. The understanding and the interpretation of writings and talks should pass these two stages. Understanding whatever is expressed in form of a language is grammatical interpretation and the understanding of whatever is in the mind and the intention of an author is psychological interpretation.
8. Shalayer Makher considered the understanding of a text in technical and psychological aspects of the text and the language. The grammatical aspect of a text is a clear matter and it is accessible applying regulations and rules. The basic problem of understanding is the technical aspect of a text that is related to its psychological aspect and the thoughts of an author and the way of his dominance in language and words. This aspect of understanding a text is subjective and its reconstruction is done through guessing and prediction. Shalayer Makher could present the grammatical regulations in the first aspect of understanding. However, he knew this point well that he did not limit himself to these regulations in the predictive reconstruction of a text because the understanding a text needs prediction. His purpose from prediction is a kind of guessing not inspiration and the blessing of God. He had a good feeling to lack of regularizing this predictive aspect of hermeneutic and interpretation. Hence, it can be said that his attempt for the presentation of a valid way in order to prevent misunderstanding was incomplete.
9. The important references of Shalayer Makher were the circle matter of understanding. He suggested the circle matter of understanding for the description of the understanding of texts. The circle of hermeneutic emphasizes on this point how specific matters and general ones are related to each other as a circle in the process of understanding in interpretation. The understanding of parts is necessary for understanding generals whereas we should understand parts for understanding generals.
On the basis of circle understanding, knowing is return action .We can understand something in the time of comparing it with something that we know more. Circle as a general defines its parts and parts form a circle. A sentence is a unit whose words are understood from the whole sentence and the meaning of a sentence depends on the meaning of its words. With regarding a mutual relationship between generals and parts, each one gets its meaning from the other one. Hence, understanding is like a circle because meaning is gained in this turn. This turn is called '' the circle of hermeneutic''.