Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the Interpreter’s Choices: Making Hermeneutic Relativity Explicit

  • Published:
Dao Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this essay, we explore the various aspects of hermeneutic relativity that have rarely been explicitly discussed. Our notion of “hermeneutic relativity” can be seen as an extension, with significant revisions, of Gadamer’s notion of Vorurteil. It refers to various choices and constraints of the interpreter, including beliefs concerning the best way of doing philosophy, what criteria are to be used to evaluate competing interpretations, and so on. The interpreter cannot completely eliminate the guidance and constraint originating from his/her “background.” However, in principle the interpreter can “choose” to be guided by other constraints. Hence, we speak of “choices” or “commitments.” Hermeneutic relativity is the major cause for the variation of competing interpretations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Allinson, Robert E. 2003. “Intercultural Hermeneutics.” In Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy, edited by Antonio S. Cua. New York and London: Routledge.

  • Ames, Roger T. 1994. “Review Hansen (1992).” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 54.2: 553–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ______. 2004a. “A Response to Critics.” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 3.2: 281–298.

  • ______. 2004b. “Indigenizing Globalization and the Hydraulics of Culture: Taking Chinese Philosophy on Its Own Terms.” Journal of Globalizations 1.2: 171–180.

  • ______. 2005. “Getting Past the Eclipse of Philosophy in World Sinology: A Response to Eske Møllgaard.” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 4.2: 347–352.

  • ______. 2011. Confucian Role Ethics: A Vocabulary. Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press.

  • Ames, Roger T., and David L. Hall, trans. 2003. Dao De Jing—Making This Life Significant—A Philosophical Translation. New York: Ballantine Books.

  • Ames, Roger T., and Henry Rosemont, trans. 1998. The Analects of Confucius: A Philosophical Translation. New York: Ballantine (Random House).

  • Berthrong, John H. 2006. “To Catch a Thief: Zhu Xi (1130–1200) and the Hermeneutic Art.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 33 (Book Supplement Series): 145–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billeter, Jean François. 1998. “Stopping, Seeing and Language: An Interpretation of Zhuangzi’s Qiwulun (Mark Elvin, Transl.).” East Asian History 15/16: 1–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Nahum, and William Franke, eds. 2016. Transcendence, Immanence, and Intercultural Philosophy. London: Palgrave-Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakrabarti, Arindam, and Ralph Weber. 2016. “Afterword/Afterwards.” In Comparative Philosophy without Borders, edited by Arindam Chakrabarti and Ralph Weber. London: Bloomsbury.

  • Chan, Alan K. L. 2003. “Wang Bi (Wang Pi).” In Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy, edited by Antonio Cua. New York and London: Routledge.

  • Chao, Yuen Ren (Zhao, Yuanren). 1969. “Dimensions of Fidelity in Translation with Special Reference to Chinese.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 29: 109–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, Chung-ying. 2000. “Confucian onto-Hermeneutics: Morality and Ontology.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 27.1: 33–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ______. 2003. “Dai Zhen (Tai Chen).” In Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy, edited by Antonio Cua. New York and London: Routledge.

  • Cua, Antonio S., ed. 2003. Encyclopedia of Chinese Philosophy. New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frege, Gottlob. 1892. “Über Sinn Und Bedeutung.” Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Philosophische Kritik 100: 25–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frisina, Warren G. 2016. “Thinking through Hall and Ames: On the Art of Comparative Philosophy.” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 15.4: 563–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 2004. Truth and Method. New York: Continuum. 2nd rev. ed., corresponding to the 5th German ed. in Gadamer’s Gesammelte Werke. Translation revised by Joel Weinsheimer and Donald G. Marshall.

  • Gardner, Daniel, trans. 1990. Learning to be a Sage: Selections from the Conversations of Master Chu, Arranged Topically. Berkeley: University of California Press.

  • Goodman, Nelson. 1978. Ways of Worldmaking. Indianapolis: Hackett.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, A. C. 1969/1970. “Chuang-Tzu’s Essay on Seeing Things as Equal.” History of Religions 9.2/3: 137–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ______. 1989. Disputers of the Tao: Philosophical Argument in Ancient China. Chicago: Open Court.

  • Guo, Xiang 郭象. 2011. “Commentary on the Zhuangzi 莊子注.” In Zhuangzi: Commentary and Subcommentary 莊子注疏, annotated by Guo Xiang 郭象 and Cheng Xuanying 成玄英 respectively, re-edited by Cao Chuji 曹礎基 and Huang Lanfa 黃蘭發. Beijing 北京: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局.

  • Hall, David L., and Roger T. Ames. 1987. Thinking through Confucius. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ______. 1991. “Against the Greying of Confucius: Responses to Gregor Paul and Michael Martin.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 18.3: 333–347.

  • ______. 1995. Anticipating China: Thinking through the Narratives of Chinese and Western Culture. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  • Han, Christina. 2013. “Between Poetry and Philosophy: The Neo-Confucian Hermeneutics of Zhu Xi’s Nine Bends Poem.” Asian Philosophy 23.1: 62–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, Chad. 1992. A Daoist Theory of Chinese Thought: A Philosophical Interpretation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ______. 2005. “Reading with Understanding: Interpretive Method in Chinese Philosophy.” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 4.2: 341–346.

  • Jenco, Leigh. 2016. “Methods from within the Chinese Tradition.” In Chinese Philosophy Methodologies, edited by Tan Sor-hoon. London: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, Jingde 黎靖德, ed. 1986. Classified Conversations of Master Zhu 朱子語類. Beijing 北京: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局.

  • Li, Xiaofan Amy. 2015. “The Notion of Originality and Degrees of Faithfulness in Translating Classical Chinese: Comparing Translations of the Liezi.” Early China 38: 109–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Yinghua. 2010. “Review of Xiaogan Liu, Interpretation and Orientation (2009).” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 9.3: 367–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin, Shuen-Fu. 2003. “Transforming the Dao: A Critique of A. C. Graham's Translation of the Inner Chapters of the Zhuangzi.” In Hiding the World in the World: Uneven Discourses on the Zhuangzi, edited by Scott Cook. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  • Littlejohn, Ronnie. 2016. “On What It Means to ‘Let a Text Speak for Itself?’: Philosophizing with Classical Chinese Texts.” In Chinese Philosophy Methodologies, edited by Tan Sor-hoon. London: Bloomsbury.

  • Ma, Huijian. 2007. “Jin Di’s and Eugene A. Nida’s Translation Theories.” Babel 53.2: 98–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Lin. 2004. “Review of Pan Derong (2003).” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 3.2: 343–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Lin. 2014. “A Zhuangzian Response to Heidegger’s Mitsein.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 41.3–4: 487–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, Lin, and Jaap van Brakel. 2013. “On the Conditions of Possibility for Comparative and Intercultural Philosophy.” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 12.3: 297–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ______. 2016a. Fundamentals of Comparative and Intercultural Philosophy. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  • ______. 2016b. “A Theory of Interpretation for Comparative and Chinese Philosophy.” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 15.4: 575–589.

  • ______. 2016c. “Revisiting Wittgenstein on Family Resemblance and Colour(s).” Philosophical Investigations 39.3: 254–280.

  • ______. 2019 (forthcoming). Beyond the Troubled Water of Shifei: From Disputation to Walking-Two-Roads in the Zhuangzi. Albany: State University of New York Press.

  • Makeham, John. 2006. “A New Hermeneutical Approach to Early Chinese Texts: The Case of the Analects.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 33 (Book Supplement Series): 95–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Michael R. 1990. “Book Review of Hall and Ames (1987).” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 17.4: 495–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martinich, A. P., and Xiao Yang. 2010. “Ideal Interpretation: The Theories of Zhu Xi and Ronald Dworkin.” Philosophy East and West 60.1: 88–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Møllgaard, Eske. 2005. “Eclipse of Reading: On the ‘Philosophical Turn’ in American Sinology.” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 4.2: 321–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neville, Robert Cummings. 1995. Normative Cultures. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng, On-cho. 2007. “Toward a Hermeneutic Turn in Chinese Philosophy: Western Theory, Confucian Tradition, and Cheng Chung-Ying’s onto-Hermeneutics.” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 6.4: 383–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ni, Peimin. 2016. “Gongfu Method in the Analects and Its Significance Beyond.” In Chinese Philosophy Methodologies, edited by Tan Sor-hoon. London: Bloomsbury.

  • Nylan, Michael. 2016. “Academic Silos, or ‘What I Wish Philosophers Knew About Early History in China’.” In Chinese Philosophy Methodologies, edited by Tan Sor-hoon. London: Bloomsbury.

  • Olberding, Garret P. S. 2012. Dubious Facts. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pan, Derong 潘德榮. 2003. Language, Hermeneutics, and Tradition: On the Transformation of Chinese Hermeneutic Tradition in the Contemporary World 文字‧詮釋‧傳統——中國詮釋傳統的現代轉化. Shanghai 上海: Shanghai Yiwen Chubanshe 上海譯文出版社.

  • Pan, Derong, and Peng Qifu. 2006. “On Zhu Xi’s Theory of Interpretation.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 33 (Book Supplement Series): 135–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, Gregor. 1991. “Reflections on the Usage of the Terms ‘Logic’ and ‘Logical’.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 18.1: 73–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, Ting-ting. 2015. “A Comparative Study of Literal Translation and Free Translation of an Extended Bridge—from Yan Fu’s Translation Criterion ‘Faithfulness, Expressiveness, and Elegance’.” Frontiers of Literary Studies in China 9: 581–615.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, Franklin. 2016. “Metaphysics and Methodology in a Cross-Cultural Context.” In Chinese Philosophy Methodologies, edited by Tan Sor-hoon. London: Bloomsbury.

  • Pfister, Lauren F. 2006. “Editor’s Introduction.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 33 (Book Supplement Series): 3–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, Hilary. 2002. The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reding, Jean-Paul. 2004. Comparative Essays in Early Greek and Chinese Rational Thinking. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, Ivor Armstrong. 1932/1997. Mencius on the Mind: Experiments in Multiple Definition. London: Curzon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roetz, Heiner. 1993. “Validity in Chou Thought: On Chad Hansen and the Pragmatic Turn in Sinology.” In Epistemological Issues in Classical Chinese Philosophy, edited by Hans Lenk and Gregor Paul. New York: State University of New York Press.

  • Rosemont, Henry. 2012. A Reader’s Companion to the Confucian Analects. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, Benjamin I. 1985. The World of Thought in Ancient China. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shun, Kwong-loi. 2009. “Studying Confucian and Comparative Ethics: Methodological Reflections.” Journal of Chinese Philosophy 36.3: 455–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ______. 2016. “Methodological Reflections on the Study of Chinese Thought.” In Chinese Philosophy Methodologies, edited by Tan Sor-hoon. London: Bloomsbury.

  • Slingerland, Edward. 2016. “Interdisciplinary Methods in Chinese Philosophy: Comparative Philosophy and the Case Example of Mind/Body Holism.” In Chinese Philosophy Methodologies, edited by Tan Sor-hoon. London: Bloomsbury.

  • Smid, Robert W. 2009. Methodologies of Comparative Philosophy: The Pragmatist and Process Traditions. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, Sor-hoon. 2016. “Introduction: Why Methodology Matters.” In Chinese Philosophy Methodologies, edited by Tan Sor-hoon. London: Bloomsbury.

  • Tan, Xiaoli, and Huang Tianyuan. 2015. “Translating Chinese Philosophy on Its Own Terms: An Interview with Professor Roger T. Ames.” Asia Pacific Translation and Intercultural Studies 2.2: 139–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Brakel, Jaap, and Ma Lin. 2015. “Extension of Family Resemblance Concepts as a Necessary Condition of Interpretation across Traditions.” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 4.4: 475–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Fraassen, Bas C. 2002. The Empirical Stance: The Terry Lectures. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, Burton. 1968. The Complete Works of Chuang Tzu. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Longxi. 1992. The Tao and the Logos: Literary Hermeneutics, East and West. Durham and London: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ______. 1999. “Translating Cultures: China and the West.” In Chinese Thought in a Global Context: A Dialogue between Chinese & Western Philosophical Approaches, edited by Karl-Heinz Pohl. Leiden: Brill.

  • Zheng, Shuhong. 2017. “Above the Literal Sense: Hermeneutical Rules in Zhu Xi, Eckhart, and Augustine.” Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 16.2: 253–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ziporyn, Brook. 2013. Beyond Oneness and Difference: Li and Coherence in Chinese Buddhist Thought and Its Antecedent. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We thank two anonymous reviewers for many insightful and helpful comments on an earlier version of this essay. Work on this article is supported by the Fund for Building World-Class Universities (Philosophy) of Renmin University of China (Project No. 2018).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Philosophy, Renmin University of China (Zhe-xue-yuan), Av. Zhongguancun 59, Haidian District, Beijing, 100872, China

    Lin Ma

  2. Hoger Instituut voor Wijsbegeerte, KU Leuven, Kardinaal Mercierplein 2, 3000, Leuven, Belgium

    Jaap van Brakel

Authors
  1. Lin Ma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jaap van Brakel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lin Ma.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ma, L., van Brakel, J. On the Interpreter’s Choices: Making Hermeneutic Relativity Explicit. Dao 17, 453–478 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11712-018-9638-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11712-018-9638-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation