폴리쾨르의 해석학에서 철학적인 것과 신학적인 것의 연관관계 (The mutual relation between Philosophicalutics and Biblical HermeneuticsHermeneutics of Paul Ricoeur)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국해석학회
· 수록지 정보 : 해석학연구 / 20호 / 59 ~ 105페이지
· 저자명 : 장경

초록

This study aims at showing the mutual belongings to the two philosophical and biblical hermeneutics in the hermeneutics of Paul Ricoeur. It seems to us that there is a complex relation of mutual inclusion between the two hermeneutics. To be sure, we start at first with the order that the initial mouvement proceeds from the philosophical to the biblical pole. The same categories of work, writing, world of the text, distanciation, and appropriation govern interpretation in one as well as in the other. In this sense, biblical hermeneutics is a regional hermeneutics in relation to philosophical hermeneutics, considered a general hermeneutics. It may then appear that we are acknowledging the subordination of biblical hermeneutics to philosophical hermeneutics by treating it as an applied hermeneutics, However, it is precised by treating theological hermeneutics as a hermeneutics applied to a type of text (biblical texts) that Ricoeur causes an inverse relation between the two hermeneutics to appear. Theological hermeneutics presents features that are so original that the relation is gradually inverted, and theological hermeneutics finally subordinates philosophical hermeneutics to itself as its own organon. It is the hermeneutical categories centered on the notion of the text.
In this process of application, Ricoeur considers that the category of the “thing of the text”(＝world of the text) is the central category, both for philosophical hermeneutics and for biblical hermeneutics. And with respect to the fourth category (self－understanding), Ricoeur has stated how it bases itself upon the world of the text in order to come to express in language. The “thing”of the text is the world it unfold before the text. And this world, especially with respect to poetic and fictional “literature”, takes a distance with regard to the everyday reality toward which ordinary discourse is directed.
The general hermeneutics invites us to say that the necessary stage between structural explanation and self－understanding is the unfolding of the world of the text. The theological implication of this is considerable. The primary task of a hermeneutics is not to bring about a decision in the reader but first to allow the world of being that is the “thing” of the biblical text to unfold. In this way, above feelings, dispositions, belief, or unbelief is placed the proposal of a world, which, in the language of the Bible, is called a new world, a new covenant, the kingdom of God, a new birth. There are realities that unfold before the text. This is what can be called the “objectivity” of the new being projected by the text. One of the features that constitues the specificity of biblical discourse is the central place held by the referent “God.” The word God does not function as a philosophical concept, no even that of being. The word God presupposes the total context constituted by th entire gravitational space of the narratives, the prophesies, the laws, the hymns, and so on. Understanding the word of God is following the arrow of meaning of the word. By “arrow of meaning,” Ricoeur intends to express its twofold power: gathering together all the significations produced by th partial discourses and opening up a horizon that escapes the closure of discourse. Ricoeur applies the same thing about the word Christ. To the twofold function stated above concerning the word God is added the power to incarnate all the religious significations in one basic symbol: the symbol of a sacrificial love, of a love stronger than death. It is the function of the teaching of the Cross and of the Resurrection to give the word God a density that the word being does net contain.
Now, We can say in what sens this biblical hermeneutics is at once a particular and unique case of the general hermeneutics. A particular case because the new being of which the Bible speaks is not to be sought anywhere but in the world of the text. A unique case because all the partial discourses are referred to a Name, which is the point of intersection and the index of the incompletion of all our discourses about God, and because this Name has become inseparable from the meaning－event, preached as the Resurrection. However, biblical hermeneutics can claim to say something unique only if this unique “thing” speaks as the world of the text that addresses us, as the “thing” of the text.

영어초록

This study aims at showing the mutual belongings to the two philosophical and biblical hermeneutics in the hermeneutics of Paul Ricoeur. It seems to us that there is a complex relation of mutual inclusion between the two hermeneutics. To be sure, we start at first with the order that the initial mouvement proceeds from the philosophical to the biblical pole. The same categories of work, writing, world of the text, distanciation, and appropriation govern interpretation in one as well as in the other. In this sense, biblical hermeneutics is a regional hermeneutics in relation to philosophical hermeneutics, considered a general hermeneutics. It may then appear that we are acknowledging the subordination of biblical hermeneutics to philosophical hermeneutics by treating it as an applied hermeneutics, However, it is precised by treating theological hermeneutics as a hermeneutics applied to a type of text (biblical texts) that Ricoeur causes an inverse relation between the two hermeneutics to appear. Theological hermeneutics presents features that are so original that the relation is gradually inverted, and theological hermeneutics finally subordinates philosophical hermeneutics to itself as its own organon. It is the hermeneutical categories centered on the notion of the text.
In this process of application, Ricoeur considers that the category of the “thing of the text”(＝world of the text) is the central category, both for philosophical hermeneutics and for biblical hermeneutics. And with respect to the fourth category (self－understanding), Ricoeur has stated how it bases itself upon the world of the text in order to come to express in language. The “thing”of the text is the world it unfold before the text. And this world, especially with respect to poetic and fictional “literature”, takes a distance with regard to the everyday reality toward which ordinary discourse is directed.
The general hermeneutics invites us to say that the necessary stage between structural explanation and self－understanding is the unfolding of the world of the text. The theological implication of this is considerable. The primary task of a hermeneutics is not to bring about a decision in the reader but first to allow the world of being that is the “thing” of the biblical text to unfold. In this way, above feelings, dispositions, belief, or unbelief is placed the proposal of a world, which, in the language of the Bible, is called a new world, a new covenant, the kingdom of God, a new birth. There are realities that unfold before the text. This is what can be called the “objectivity” of the new being projected by the text. One of the features that constitues the specificity of biblical discourse is the central place held by the referent “God.” The word God does not function as a philosophical concept, no even that of being. The word God presupposes the total context constituted by th entire gravitational space of the narratives, the prophesies, the laws, the hymns, and so on. Understanding the word of God is following the arrow of meaning of the word. By “arrow of meaning,” Ricoeur intends to express its twofold power: gathering together all the significations produced by th partial discourses and opening up a horizon that escapes the closure of discourse. Ricoeur applies the same thing about the word Christ. To the twofold function stated above concerning the word God is added the power to incarnate all the religious significations in one basic symbol: the symbol of a sacrificial love, of a love stronger than death. It is the function of the teaching of the Cross and of the Resurrection to give the word God a density that the word being does net contain.
Now, We can say in what sens this biblical hermeneutics is at once a particular and unique case of the general hermeneutics. A particular case because the new being of which the Bible speaks is not to be sought anywhere but in the world of the text. A unique case because all the partial discourses are referred to a Name, which is the point of intersection and the index of the incompletion of all our discourses about God, and because this Name has become inseparable from the meaning－event, preached as the Resurrection. However, biblical hermeneutics can claim to say something unique only if this unique “thing” speaks as the world of the text that addresses us, as the “thing” of the text.

참고자료

· 없음