Abstract

This dissertation critically examines the recent work of Paul Ricoeur concerning the nature of human action and its appropriate mode of investigation. His view of human action qua text is explored as well as his belief that the hermeneutical method is the best choice of a mode of inquiry appropriate to the human sciences. ;The foundation for his beliefs about human action is his theory of language and his theory of textuality. These are examined closely. Then, using his work on the kinship between models and metaphors, the way these views are metaphorical extended to human action is demonstrated. A critical approach is taken to reveal the difficulties which arise out of the use of the model of the text, but by and large a sympathetic agreement with Paul Ricoeur's approach is reached. ;The hermeneutical method constructed by Paul Ricoeur suggests a position of methodological separatism. The import of such a position is carefully detailed and the hermeneutical method is tested against a taxonomy of claims to determine if, indeed Ricoeur presents a defensible separatist position. The dissertation concludes that, although he may be described as a methodological parallelist, on three specific counts he qualifies as a separatist