Hermeneutic Circle Explained

[Terry Chavarin]

Thehermeneutic circle (German: hermeneutischer Zirkel) describes the process of understanding a text hermeneutically. It refers to the idea that one's understanding of the text as a whole is established by reference to the individual parts and one's understanding of each individual part by reference to the whole. The circle is a metaphor for the procedure of transforming one's understanding of the part and the whole through iterative recontextualization.

St. Augustine of Hippo was the first philosopher and theologian to have introduced the hermeneutic cycle of faith and reason (in Latin: credo ut intellegam and intellego ut credam). The circle was conceived to improve the Biblical exegesis and it was activated by the personal belief in the truthfulness of God. According to the Confessions, misleading verses of the Bible shall be read at the light of the Holy Spirit God and in the context of "the spirit of the Bible as a whole",[1] intended as a unique and non-contradictory text divinely inspired.[2]

Wilhelm Dilthey used the example of understanding a sentence as an example of the circular course of hermeneutic understanding. He particularly stressed that meaning and meaningfulness were always contextual. Thus the meaning of any sentence cannot be fully interpreted unless we know the historical circumstances of its utterance. And this means that interpretation is always linked to the situation of the interpreter, because one can only construct a history from the particular set of circumstances in which one currently exists. Thus Dilthey says: "Meaningfulness fundamentally grows out of a relation of part to whole that is grounded in the nature of living experience."[5] For Dilthey, "Meaning is not subjective; it is not projection of thought or thinking onto the object; it is a perception of a real relationship within a nexus prior to the subject-object separation in thought."[5][6]

Martin Heidegger (1927) developed the concept of the hermeneutic circle to envision a whole in terms of a reality that was situated in the detailed experience of everyday existence by an individual (the parts). So understanding was developed on the basis of "fore-structures" of understanding, that allow external phenomena to be interpreted in a preliminary way.

Hans-Georg Gadamer (1975) further developed this concept, leading to what is recognized as a break with previous hermeneutic traditions. While Heidegger saw the hermeneutic process as cycles of self-reference that situated our understanding in a priori prejudices, Gadamer reconceptualized the hermeneutic circle as an iterative process through which a new understanding of a whole reality is developed by means of exploring the detail of existence. Gadamer viewed understanding as linguistically mediated, through conversations with others in which reality is explored and an agreement is reached that represents a new understanding.[7] The centrality of conversation to the hermeneutic circle is developed by Donald Schn, who characterizes design as a hermeneutic circle that is developed by means of "a conversation with the situation."[8]

Paul de Man, in his essay "Form and Intent in the American New Criticism," talks about the hermeneutic circle with reference to paradoxical ideas about "textual unity" espoused by and inherited from American criticism. De Man points out that the "textual unity" New Criticism locates in a given work has only a "semi-circularity" and that the hermeneutic circle is completed in "the act of interpreting the text." Combining Gadamer and Heidegger into an epistemological critique of interpretation and reading, de Man argues that with New Criticism, American Criticism "pragmatically entered" the hermeneutic circle, "mistaking it for the organic circularity of natural processes."[9]

Judith N. Shklar (1986) points out the ambiguity in the meaning and function of the "circle" as a metaphor for understanding. It is taken to refer to a geometric circle, rather than a circular process, it seems to imply a center, but it is unclear whether the interpreter him/herself stands there, or whether, on the contrary, some "organizing principle and illuminating principle apart from him [is] there waiting to be discovered."[10] Furthermore, and more problematic for Shklar, "the hermeneutic circle makes sense only if there is a known and closed whole, which can be understood in terms of its own parts and which has as its core God, who is its anchor and creator. Only the Bible really meets these conditions. It is the only possibly wholly self-sufficient text."[10] A further problem relates to the fact that Gadamer and others assume a fixed role for tradition (individual and disciplinary/academic) in the process of any hermeneutic understanding, while it is more accurate to say that interpreters have multiple and sometimes conflicting cultural attachments, yet this does not prevent intercultural and/or interdisciplinary dialogue. Finally, she warns that, at least in social science, interpretation is not a substitute for explanation.

Understanding the hermeneutic circle is key to critical reading. The hermeneutic circle refers to the idea that our understanding of a text as a whole is based on our understanding of each individual part, as well as our understanding of how each individual part refers to the whole text.

As you are reading this sentence, you are doing two things at the same time: understanding single words, and weighing the meaning of each word against your overall meaning of the sentence as the text unfolds, continuously considering whether your current understanding aligns or clashes with previous interpretations as well as existing beliefs, knowledge, and expectations.

Qualitative methods and interpretive research often rely on hermeneutic analysis, which carries the assumption that phenomena within the social world can only be understood in the greater historical and cultural context surrounding them. The data analysis resulting from a full consideration of hermeneutics holds great potential in fields such as sociology, cultural and social anthropology, theoretical and philosophical psychology, and more applied fields such as nursing research and education. To unpack this idea more fully, this article looks at the general concept of hermeneutics, its role in informing qualitative methods, and the importance of a hermeneutic philosophy in the qualitative research process.

In its simplest form, hermeneutics emerged as a theory and methodology of interpretation, especially of texts and symbolic content. The hermeneutic tradition, with its roots in ancient philosophical traditions, has evolved to become a cornerstone in the humanities and social sciences. The historical development of hermeneutics traces back to its initial use in interpreting religious scriptures and legal texts. Over time, it expanded beyond these confines, morphing into a comprehensive framework for understanding not only written texts but also oral narratives, cultural phenomena, and even social practices. This evolution reflects the growing recognition of the complexity and multi-dimensionality of human understanding and communication.

Central to hermeneutics is the concept of the hermeneutic circle. This foundational idea posits that understanding a text or a symbolic expression involves a dynamic interplay between the interpretation of its individual components and the comprehension of the whole. For instance, when interpreting a novel, one's grasp of a single chapter is enhanced by the broader context of the entire narrative, and this overarching understanding, in turn, influences the interpretation of each chapter. This circular process underscores the iterative nature of understanding, where each step informs and is informed by the other. It challenges the notion of linear, straightforward interpretation, suggesting instead that our understanding is inherently subjective and influenced by our preconceptions and the specific context of the text.

The contributions of Hans-Georg Gadamer have been pivotal in shaping modern hermeneutics. Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics extended the discipline beyond the realms of textual interpretation, positing it as a fundamental aspect of human existence. He argued that understanding is not a passive receipt of information but an active, dialogical process. This process is inherently influenced by the interpreter's historical context and prejudices. Gadamer's hermeneutics emphasizes the role of history and culture in shaping understanding and scientific knowledge of the social world, highlighting the subjective and situated nature of all interpretation. His work reminds us that our interpretations are always colored by our historical and cultural backgrounds, and thus, understanding is not just about deciphering texts or symbols but also about self-reflection and acknowledging our own biases.

In the broader scope of qualitative research, Gadamer's insights into hermeneutics offer profound implications. His perspective encourages researchers to engage deeply with their subject matter, recognizing that their interpretations are influenced by their own backgrounds as well as the historical and cultural contexts of the phenomena they study. This awareness enriches the research process, fostering a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the complex tapestry of human experience. Hermeneutics, thus, becomes more than a method of interpretation; it transforms into a lens through which researchers can explore and understand the rich, layered meanings that underpin human social and cultural practices. In fields ranging from sociology and anthropology to psychology and education, hermeneutics offers a pathway to delve into the depths of human experience, uncovering insights that are as profound as they are essential for a holistic understanding of our world.

Hermeneutics, as a field, has branched out into various sub-disciplines, each focusing on specific aspects of interpretation and understanding. These branches reflect the diverse applications and theoretical foundations of hermeneutics in different areas of study. Each of these branches of hermeneutics contributes to the richness of the field, offering diverse perspectives on the complex process of interpretation. Together, they highlight the multifaceted nature of understanding, underscoring the importance of context, dialogue, and reflexivity in the interpretive process.

3a8082e126