Tampilkan postingan dengan label Western Studies. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Western Studies. Tampilkan semua postingan

Selasa, 20 Agustus 2013

Sejarah dan Pengertian Hermeneutika



Sejarah dan Pengertian Hermeneutika

(1)         Hermeneuse: Vedder mendefinisikan istilah ini dengan “die inhaltliche Erklaerung oder Interpretation eines Textes, Kunstwerkes oder des Verhaltens einer Person” (penjelasan atau interpretasi sebuah teks, karya seni atau prilaku seseorang).[1] Dalam pandangan Jung, terma ini tampaknya tidak berbeda dengan istilah-istilah seperti Auslegung/Interpretation (penafsiran) dan Verstehen (pemahaman) dengan segala bentuknya.[2] Dari definisi ini dapatlah diketahui bahwa istilah tersebut me-refer kepada aktivitas penafsiran terhadap obyek-obyek tertentu seperti teks, simbol-simbol seni (lukisan, novel, puisi dll.) dan prilaku manusia. Hermeneuse tidak terkait secara substansial dengan metode-metode dan requirements (‘syarat-syarat’) serta foundations (hal-hal yang melandasi) penafsiran. 
(2)         Hermeneutik: Jika seseorang kemudian berbicara tentang regulasi/aturan, methode atau strategi/langkah penafsiran, maka berarti bahwa dia sedang berbicara tentang hermeneutika. Jadi, hermeneutika concern dengan pertanyaan bagaimana atau dengan method apa sebuah teks (atau yang lain) seharusnya ditafsirkan. Sejarah hermeneutika, menurut Vedder,  membicarakan secara kontinu aturan-aturan penafsiran.[3] Apa yang dimaksudkan oleh Vedder ini mirip dengan apa yang dikemukakan oleh Matthias Jung ketika dia menyampaikan bahwa hermeneutik adalah Technik zum Extrahieren eines einheitlichen Schriftsinns (teknik menguak kesatuan makna teks).[4] Termasuk dalam kategori hermeneutik adalah, misalnya, pemikiran-pemikiran J. Dannhaueser dalam bukunya Hermeneutica sacra sive methodus exponendarum sacrarum literarum (1654) yang memuat teorie-teori dan prinsip-prinsip penafsiran; Spinoza (1632-1677) dalam bukunya Tractatus Theologico-Politicus yang di dalamnya dia mengeksplorasi ide-idenya tentang metode-metode penafsiran Bibel, meskipun dalam beberapa kasus ide-idenya bisa digolongkan atau mengarah ke ‘hermeneutical philosophy’ (filsafat hermeneutis); and Schleiermacher yang tertarik dengan  permasalahan bagaimana  seseorang menafsirkan teks secara benar dan obyektif.[5] Berdasarkan definisi ini, buku The Hermeneutical Spiral[6] karya Grant R. Osborne juga bisa digolongkan ke dalam karya hermeneutik, karena teori, metode dan strategi penafsiran dibahas di dalamnya dengan sangat detail.
(3)         Philosophische Hermeneutik: Hermeneutika filosofis tidak lagi membicarakan  metode eksegetik tertentu sebagai obyek pembahasan inti, melainkan hal-hal yang terkait dengan “conditions of the possibility” (“kondisi-kondisi kemungkinan”) yang dengannya seseorang dapat memahami dan menafsirkan sebuah teks, simbol atau prilaku. Pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang dimunculkan dalam hermeneutika filosofis adalah: Bagaimana kita ‘mungkin’ menafsirkan teks atau prilaku manusia? Syarat-syarat (requirements) apa yang dapat membuat penafsiran itu mungkin (dilakukan)? Requirement adalah suatu kerangka (framework) yang atasnya sebuah penafsiran didasarkan dan karenanya ia mungkin dilakukan.[7] Menurut Jung, yang menjadi sentral pemikiran dalam hermeneutika filosofis adalah “meneliti jalan masuk ke realitas penafsiran”.[8] Dilthey, misalnya, lebih banyak berbicara tentang kondisi-kondisi dan fondasi (basis) penafsiran daripada metode-metode penafsiran dan aplikasinya. Gadamer dalam Wahrheit und Methode menghindari diri dari membicarakan metode-metode eksegetis dan beranjak ke diskusi mengenai kerangka dan fondasi hermeneutis.
(4)         Hermeneutische Philosophie: Apa yang disebut dengan ‘filsafat hermeneutis’ adalah bagian dari pemikiran-pemikiran filsafat yang mencoba menjawab problem kehidupan manusia dengan cara menafsirkan apa yang diterima oleh manusia dari sejarah dan tradisi. Manusia sendiri dipandang sebagai ‘makhluk hermeneutis’ (a hermeneutical being), dalam arti makhluk yang harus memahami dirinya.[9] Jadi, proses pemahaman terkait dengan problem-problem seperti epistemologi, ontologi, etika dan aestetika.[10] Filsafat ini dapat kita temui, misalnya, dalam filsafat Heidegger.



[1]      Vedder, Was ist Hermeneutik?, h. 9.
[2]      Jung, Hermeneutik zur Einführung, h. 19.
[3]      Vedder, Was ist Hermeneutik, h. 9-10.
[4]      Jung, Hermeneutik zur Einführung, h. 9. Pada halaman 20 dia mendefinisikannya dengan Methodenlehre der sachgerechten Auslegung (ajaran tentang metode penafsiran yang benar).
[5]      Vedder, Was ist Hermeneutik, h. 14-15.
[6]      Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove: Intervarsity Press, 1991). Pada bagian pengahuluan Osborne juga memberikan definisi hermeneutika dengan “ilmu pengetahuan yang membicarakan prinsip atau metode penafsiran terhadap maksud sang pengarang teks.” (h. 5)
[7]      Vedder, Was ist Hermeneutik?, h. 10-11.
[8]      Jung, Hermeneutik zur Einführung, h. 21-22.
[9]      Vedder, Was ist Hermeneutik?, h. 11.
[10]     Jung, Hermeneutik zur Einführung, h. 22.

SCHLEIERMACHER DISCURCUS



SCHLEIERMACHER;
OBJECTIVE TREND OF HERMENEUTICS

Biografi: His name is Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher, was born in Breslau (Jerman) 1768,  1834, in Protestan family.
Education: Institusi Morovian Brethren interest in Humanisme related, because of his sceptisisme to Christian’s doctrine, he moved to University of  Halle which considered more liberal than it. There he studied Theology, Philoshopy and Clasical Philology.
Career:
- private tutor (1790-1793)
- pastur in Landsberg (1794-1796)
- professor of theology in University of Berlin (1811)
His Work:
1.      On What Gives Values to Life (1792.3)
2.      On Freedom (1793.4)
3.      Spinozim (1793.4)
4.      Brief Presentation of Spinozist system (1793.4)
5.      Jurnal Athenaeum (1798.1800)
6.      On Religion: Speechest its Cultural Despisers
His thought:
When he becomed a pastur, he influenced romantisisme/obyektivisme, as like as August Wilhelm Schlegel.
Hermeuneutica was on site not only for Bible and classical text but also more exstensive in problem of human understanding as such. In His opinion, the object of interpretation included symbols, swan arts, and human’s behavior. This Hermeuneutic be familiar as  hermeneutica generalis or universal hermeneutics, which in 17 century ever concepted by Johann Conrad Dannhauer. Schleiermacher try to position this hermeuneutic middle of others sience which popular at the time, specifically Logical and Philology. At the past, Hermeuneutic as appendix for Logical all at once part of Philology.
Hermeuneutic relevance with rhetorica and dialectica:
# Paralelisme between Hermeuneutic and rhetorica is on the fact, that every act of understanding  as inversion of speech-act.
Dependence Hermeuneutic and rhetorica at dialectica in the fact that development of all sience a given under speech and understanding.
Act and art for speech are rhetorica’s domain, whereas process to understanding are Hermeuneutic’s domain. Both of can’t be separated. In  other side, dialectica is identificated by:
1.      Presentation of principles of the art of philosophizing, or
2.      Foundations for the artistic carring out of dialogue in the domain of pure thought.
# The relationship between Hermeuneutic and dialectica based on relation in universal aspect from language and the fact that individuals can borrow same words which use universally with different meanings. The distinguish between them are:
-          The art of explanation and transliteration (Hermeuneutic) include language to thought, move to the specific aim which purposed by them on their statement and their context.
-          Whereas dialectica include thought to language move to general validity under of universal argument.
# Understanding is only a being-in-one-another of these two moments of the grammatical and psychological.
Vedder explain more clear that Hermeuneutic concern in language and history (objective oriented) and Hermeuneutic psichologic/ technis concern in language study as somebody life expression (subjective oriented).
Both are completely equal and it would be wrong to call grammatical interpretation the lower and psychological interpretation the higher.
a.       Grammatical Hermeneutics
Grammatical hermeneutics is an interpretation relied on language analysis. Progressively an interpreter masters the language, progressively his interpretation get better. In the eyes of Schleiermacher this is the ‘objective’ side of interpretation. He defined some language principles which must be kept abreast.
1.      Paying attention to exist language system in the text appearance moment in order to reach an objective meaning.
2.      The sense of every word must be determined according to its being together with those that surround it. Hence, an interpreter must to paid attention to the relation among elements in the sentence and relation of sentence among sentences.
3.      The vocabulary and the history of the era of an author relates as the whole from which his writings must be understood as the part, and the whole must, in turn, must understood from the part.
b.      Psychological Hermeneutics
Schleiermacher had a notion that someone can not fathom a meaning of text only simply by paying attention to language aspect, but also psychological aspect of its author. According to him, the text does not stand alone but depended on its author. Text is author’s self expression as a response to what he had or is facing.
Schleiermacher offered two important methods in order to understand the psychological aspect of author; divinatory and comparative method. Divinatory method is the method in which one transforms oneself into the other person and tries to understand the individual element directly. Whereas comparative method is comparing someone with other by assumption they have congruities in order to get to know him. Schleiermacher affirmed that both methods are inseparable because for divination only receives its certainty via confirmatory comparison, without this it can always be incredible.
AVOIDING MISUNDERSTANDING
According to Schleiermacher, the said items above have to be given a damn to avoid misunderstanding. There are two kinds of misunderstanding; 1) qualitative misunderstanding that occurred in the content of text, and 2) quantitative misunderstanding that occurred in the tone of text. From the other facet, misunderstanding divided into; 1) positive misunderstanding or an isolated moment, and 2) active misunderstanding or the imputation which is the consequence of one’s own prejudice and one side preference for what is close to the individual’s circles of idea and rejection of what lies outside it.
In order to avoid these misunderstandings, interpreters have to do four analyses as follow: objectively historical analysis, objectively divinatory analysis, subjectively historical analysis, and subjectively divinatory analysis.
1.      Objectively historical analysis means realizing how the utterance relates to the totality of language and knowledge enclosed within it as a product of language.
2.      Objectively divinatory analysis means to conjecture how the utterance itself will become a point of development of language.
3.      Subjectively historical analysis means knowing how the utterance is given as a fact in the mind.
4.      Subjectively divinatory analysis means to how the thoughts contained in the mind will continue to have an effect in and on utterance.
All interpretation theories which have been mention above in order to reinvent the objective meaning. Nevertheless, such objectivity within the meaning of his idea is not the completely objectivity, but quasi-objectivity. According to him, objective is only to be achieved by approximation.

Jorge J.E. Gracia And Al-Qur'an Exegecis



A.    Introduction
Hermeneutics , use Gadamer’s definition, means the practical art involved in such things as preaching, interpreting other language, explaining and explicating texts, and as the basis of all of these, the art of understanding, an art particularly required any time  the meaning of something is not clear and unambiguous.
A text that produced by author in the specific time of course was influented by its every thing at that time. When it bought to other time, it has any problem, how can we understanding it whereas we can’t meet with its author?
 As contemporary scholar on hermeneutics study, he categorized as one of objectivist-cum-subjectivist discipline. This paper would be presenting about what his hermeneutics? And why he categorized as  objectivist-cum-subjectivist  discipline. And the last we try to explore about significant Gracia’s theory with al-Qur’an’s study and interpretation.
B.     Biography of Jorge J.E. Gracia[1]
Jorge J.E. Gracia was born 1942 in Cuba. Now he works in the State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo as professor in the Department of Philosophy and Department of Comparative Literature.
Gracia was educated in Cuba, Canada and the United States. He studied in Bachiller en Ciencias and Bachiller en Letras, with highest honors, St. Thomas Military Academy, La Habana, 1960. Then he get B.A. in Philosophy, with honors, Wheaton College, 1965, M.A. in Philosophy, University of Chicago, 1966  M.S.L. in Philosophy, magna cum laude, Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1970  Ph.D. in Medieval Philosophy, University of Toronto, 1971.
Father: Dr. Ignacio J. L. de la C. Gracia Dubié
Mother: Leonila M. Otero Muñoz
Married to Norma E. Silva Casabé in 1966
Daughters: Leticia Isabel and Clarisa Raquel
Grandchildren: James M. Griffin, Clarisa E. Griffin, Sofia G. Taberski, and Eva L. Taberski
Office Addresses:
                  Department of  Philosophy, University at Buffalo
                  123 Park Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260-4150
                  Phone: (716) 645-2444; FAX (716) 645-6139

                  Department of Comparative Literature, University at Buffalo
                  631 Clemens Hall, Buffalo, NY  14260-4610
                  Phone: (716) 645-2066; FAX (716) 645-5979
Home Address:
                  420 Berryman Dr.
                  Amherst, NY 14226               
                  Phone: (716) 835-5747
His book on hermeneutics study:
a.       Texts: Ontological Status, Identity, Author, Audience. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1996, 225 pp.
b.      A Theory of Textuality: The Logic and Epistemology. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1995, 327 pp.
c.       Ed., with William Irwin, Philosophy and the Interpretation of Popular Culture. In preparation
d.      Ed., Mel Gibson's Passion and Philosophy: The Cross, the Questions, the Controversy. La Salle, IL: Open Court, 2004.
e.       Ed., with Jiyuan Yu, Uses and Abuses of the Classics: Interpretation in Philosophy. London: Ashgate, 2004.
f.       Ed., with Carolyn Korsmeyer and Rodolphe Gasché. Literary Philosophers: Borges, Calvino, Eco. New York: Routledge, 2002, 241 pp.
C.     The Development of Textual Interpretation[2]
Text was historical data, it produced by author who life with specific tradition, culture, science. When this text brought to other space and other time it will be problem. Contemporary interpreter  very close to get meaning of the text which produced by author at stated period. Because of text was part of past, so to go an errand of text only entity of text it self which can be held by interpreter. Gracia try to put up his theory as a bridge of discrepancy between two situations: when text was produce by author and when text must be interpreted in other situation.
The interpretation cannot get out of three aspects:
1.      Text (interpretandum)
It can be called “historical data”. A text have information around it which can explain where, when, who, how, and why a text produce. Every text which appears over stated period it can be interpreted. 
2.      Interpreter
3.      Additional information (interpretans)
Interpretans is additional information around the text. In other hand it will be distorting interpretandum, but misconception of meaning will be appearing if it ignored. Gracia called it as “Interpreter’s Dilemma” which solved by “the Principle of Proportional Understanding”: the quantity of understanding produces by contemporary audience must be equal with the quantity of understanding created by author and historical audience.  
            There are three functions of interpretation
1.      Historical function, to recreate understanding in the contemporary audience acts understanding of author and historical audience.
2.      Meaning function, create understanding in the contemporary audience acts where they can see and evolve meaning of text, whether same to those produced by the author and historical audience or not.
3.      Implicative function, to emerge understanding in the contemporary audience acts until understood the implication meaning of the text.
Based on its purpose, he divided the interpretation became two kinds:
1.      Textual interpretation, can be definite as act of interpretation with additional information (interpretans). The result of this is one of interpretation’s function has explained before (historical function, meaning function, or implicative function). This not only talk about general meaning same as wording of text but also about create new meaning of text, actually pay attention to contemporary audience, historical audience and author.
2.      Non-textual interpretation, purpose nothing else than produce beyond wording text meaning. Here, the goal of interpretation is to produce understanding not only based on the text with its meaning and implication of text it self but its relation with other texts and aspect beyond.  This able take (for instance) psychological approach, legal interpretation, scientific approach, etc to produce it. So, it possible to produce new meaning of text which same as wording of text or not but related with text.


Truth Value of Textual Interpretation
There are three kind of textual interpretation result, historical function, meaning function, and implicative meaning, so the question how about the truth value of interpretation on Gracia’s view? When historical interpretation done successfully, is it called as truth? And the other is false? Or vice versa?
In this case, the truth value may be plural, and he argues that justification of truth/correct or false/incorrect on result of interpretation is not relevant. But, it may be judge by term “more effective” and “lack effective”.
Plurality of Truth Value of Textual Interpretation
The meaning function and implication meaning both related with personal or subjectivity (interpreter and contemporary audience), actually will related with diverge of cultures. Both have opened differences understanding each other. For instance, Aristoteles work has interpreted by scholars with different background. Not only on science case but also on philosophical study. About plurality of interpretation he argues that final and definitive descriptions in science or philosophy cannot be reached.
Objectivity and subjectivity of Interpretation
Because of interpretation built on interpretandum and interpretans, so it contains objectivity and subjectivity aspect at one time. So, how we measure when it called as highly objective or when it called as highly subjective? It called highly objective when interpreter pay high attention to interpretandum and historical aspect, and it called highly subjective when he pay low attention interpretandum and historical aspect.


D.    Signification Gracia’s Hermeneutic in Study and al-Qur’an’s Interpretations (Ulum al-Tafsir)
1.      Create Tafsir’s definition that more sophisticated
In classical interpretation books, etymologically word tafsir means kasyf and bayan. In al-Zarkasyi’s definition that three activities in al-Qur’an’s interpretation. There are: (1) understand (fahm), (2) explain (bayan), (3) produce/take out (istikhraj). Whereas, this aspects covered the importants things in interpretation. But, al-Zarkasyi doesn’t explore the meaning from that aspects, like the difference between fahm, bayan, and istikhraj.
Concerned with term fahm (understand), Gracia gives a long definition. He said “understand is not, however, the some as meaning. Understanding is a kind of a mental act whereby one grasps something, which in the case of texts is their meaning”. From that definition can be understood that “understand” is a mental act that efforts for get the meaning of text. So, the understand has psychology and personal character grounded on the exegesis before publish to public.
Whereas term bayan (explain) is the next step of interpretation after fahm. The interpreter after understands the meaning from text, so he must explain meaning of text in written or speaking form with method give additional information and analysis. The offer from Gracia about the form of bayan is with his historical function and meaning function of interpretation. The last, term istikhraj (take out). This concepts can be elaborated with Gracia’s theory about implicative function of interpretation.
2.      Strengthen Ethic in Interpretation
The true ethic of interpretation is free from truth claim or we shouldn’t claim that our interpretation is the most true, and other is false. Mutual respect inter-Islamic school appear from classic Muslim scholar’s era. The Gracia’s theory about plurality of interpretations, diversity of interpretation function, and truth value can be strengthen ethic in interpretation of al-Qur’an.

E.     Conclution
Gracia is contemporary western scholars who expert in philosophical and historical study. To solve any problem of interpretation, he presents a method: The Development of Textual Interpretation. There, he tries to combine subjective and objective case proportionately. It shown that his hermeneutics discipline as subjective-cum-objective.
All this time moslem scholars agree that the meaning of tafsir was explanation (bayan), but on Gracia’s view that tafsir covered three aspect: fahm, bayan, and istikhraj. The Gracia’s theory about plurality of interpretations, diversity of interpretation function, and truth value can strengthen ethic in interpretation of al-Qur’an.
This paper hasn’t perfect yet. So, we hope critics and suggestion from lecture, actually, and friends for be better next time.



[2] All of data on this paper took out from Hermeneutika dan Pengembangan Ulumul Qur’an written by Dr. Phil. Sahiron Syamsuddin, M. A.

Social Icons