Interpretation,method And Objectivity

Italian philosopher Emilio Betti is one of the most important philosophers of the 20 th century in the field of hermeneutics.His masterpiece,Teoria generale della interpretazione,is a landmark work in the field of hermeneutics,and the best contemporary representative of Schleiermacher and Dilthey's methodologically hermeneutic tradition.In Betti's hermeneutic theory,he tries to construct a set of general methodology for the human sciences,which has been neglected by the German interpretation tradition to ensure the objectivity of interpretation in the human sciences,and thus prevents understanding from falling into the quandary of relativism.Betti analyzes in detail the three elements of understanding,that is,the interpreter,the spirit of the "other",and the meaning-full form.The meaning-full form is the objectification of the human spirit,and the spirit of the "other" is contained in it.Understanding means through a meaning-full form,the spirit of the interpreter awakens the spirit of the "other" who was asleep in a meaning-full form.This meaning-full form serves as a vehicle for the dialogue between the interpreter and the spirit of the "other" who lives in the objectification.On the one hand,Betti emphasizes the stability and objectivity of the meaning fixed in the meaning-full form.On the other hand,he also affirms the possibility that the historical interpreters can reconsider the form.The meaning-full form embodies the meaning and information that have been objectified by the creative actions of the “other”.The process of reconsideration involves reconstructing and re-expressing the spirit of the “other” through the form.The reconsideration of the interpreter strives to exclude as much as possible the interference of the subjective factors of the interpreter,and be faithful to the spirit of the “other” expressed in the meaning-full form.The interpreter can reconstruct the "other's" thought in a traceable way because the interpreter shares the common humanity with the "other".In order to ensure the objectivity of understanding,Betti establishs his methodological canons of hermeneutics: 1)the canon of the hermeneutical autonomy of the object;2)the canon of totality and coherence of hermeneutical evaluation;3)the canon of the actuality of understanding;4)the canon of the harmonization of understanding hermeneutical correspondence and agreement.Moreover,Betti relates his principles with the methodologically hermeneutical traditions of Schleiermacher and Dilthey.These canons include the autonomy and internality of interpretation,as well as the consistency of interpretative tasks.In addition,these canons are also relevant to the subject of the interpretative activities,including the reality and the adequacy of understanding.Besides,Betti also studies the interpretative process of different interpretative types such as philology,history,translation,drama,and music.For Betti,the purpose or result of the interpretation,first of all,is to reconsider the spirit of the “other” attached to the meaning-full form.However,this reconsideration has never been a simple imitation,but a reproduction in a broader sense.The new meaning-full form reached by the interpreter reflects the unique perspective of the interpreter.In addition,the understanding of reproduction also means a new audience circle.The purpose of the interpretation is to re-express a primitive meaning at a different level for the new "audiences" to understand.In the history of hermeneutics in the 20 th century,the debate between Gadamer and Betti has important historical implication.Their differences are multiple and substantial.Taking "Truth and Method" as the title of the work,Gadamer aims to criticize the idea of using methodology as a method of seeking truth in interpretation.Gadamer's theoretical interest lies in the phenomenological and ontological description of the interpretative activities.On the other hand,Betti aims to construct a hermeneutical methodological system,establishing methodological basis for human sciences.The fundamental difference between Gadamer and Betti lies in the different emphasis of the subject and object of interpretation.Gadamer focuses on the role of the subject in the interpretative activity.Although Betti is also concerned with the subject,he more focuses on the role and characteristics of the object and prevents the understanding falling into the relativism.Reconstructing Betti's hermeneutic thoughts,on the one hand,reveals the style of the ancient academic tradition of hermeneutics;on the other hand,sheds light on understanding the traditional Chinese interpretative methods,and thus to construct our own interpretative methods in a new way.