Abstract

This article proceeds on two main assumptions. The 'understanding' of universes of discourse and human practice can no longer be based on the rules developed by older systems of hermeneutics. Modern hermeneutics has not tried to compensate this loss of methodological efficiency by working out new frameworks. It is rather exclusively occupied with efforts to provide 'foundations'. Thus we get ontological, dialectical, transcendental etc. systems. These may serve as general possibilities for looking at history. They do not, however, advance the solution of the manifold methodological difficulties of concrete research. A functional analysis of fundamentalist hermeneutics can demonstrate more precisely that this type of theory has largely proved fruitless. Certainly we cannot do without fundamentalist concepts like historicity, tradition, consciousness or, for that matter, emancipation. It is equally clear, however, that these concepts cannot merely be defined along the lines prescribed by philosophies of science. The present article therefore pleads for an anthropological extension and specification of 'hermeneutic' frameworks which should allow us to analyse historical life forms, ways of experience, strategies of meaning formation in a more precise and differentiated manner