POSTHERMENEUTICA: HERMENEUTICS IN THE POSTMODERN STUDY OF RELIGIONS

Öz

Postmodernity advocates the heterogeneity of the text, destroying its homogeneity, by linking up to its reader rather than the author-text relationship as well as by deforming it, changing it; by doing so, it aims to bring about some specific theories such as poststructuralism (post-structuralism), de-structuralism, negative rationalism and negative reading. In this article, after having enlisted the theories about hermeneutics done by classical, modernist and postmodernist philosophers we examined the basic composite elements of posthermeneutics such as reader-centered reading, critical understanding proper to the reader, subjective-dialogical language, instant or present time-history, individual deconstructive narration, critical pluralist and negative-reason, and negative aesthetics. In this context we may say that posthermeneutics is bound not only to postmodern religious phenomenon, but also to the theories of interpretation produced in the fields such as secular literature and civil law, insisting on various possibilities of understanding as well as more diverse theories oriented towards more sharpened and radical interpretations.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• modernism,postmodernism,study of religions,hermeneutics,interpretation

POSTHERMENEUTICA: POSTMODERN DİN BİLİMLERİNDE HERMENÖTİK

Öz

Postmodernite, yazar-metin ilişkisinden ziyade okuyucuya bağlı metin anlayışını geliştirmek, değiştirmek, şeklini bozmak, yapısını sökmek suretiyle metnin homojenliğini ortadan kaldırıp “heterojenliğini” savunmakta; bunu yaparken kendine özgü “ileri yapısalcılık (post-structuralism), yapı-sökücü (destructionist) negatif akılcılık, negatif okuma gibi özgün teoriler geliştirmeyi” amaçlamaktadır. Bu makalede Hermenötik biliminin tarihini klasik, modern ve postmodern filozofların teorilerini listeleyerek verdikten sonra eleştirel özellikte okuyucu merkezli okuma, okuyucuyla uyumlu eleştirel anlama, mitten arındırılmış sübjektif diyalojik dil, şimdiki öznel zaman veya tarih, bireysel yapı-bozucu anlatı, negatif, çoğulcu eleştirel akıl ve negatif estetik gibi posthermenötiğin temel yorumlama yapıtaşlarını inceledik. Bu bağlamda diyebiliriz ki Post-Hermenötik, postmoderniteye bağlı geliştirilen sadece özgün din olgusuna değil, seküler edebiyat ve sivil hukuk gibi alanlarda yorum teorileri üreterek çeşitli anlama imkânlarına veyahut yorum farklılıklarına vurgu yapmakta; böylelikle hiç olmadığından daha keskin ve radikal yorumlara yönelebilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• modernizm,postmodernizm,Hermenötik,din bilimleri,yorum

Kaynakça

1. Brad, Elliot Stone, “Subjectivity and Truth”, Michel Foucault- Key Concepts, ed. Dianna Taylor, Acumen Press, Durham 2011, 143-157.
2. Bourgeois, Patrick L., “Recognizing Ricoeur: In Memoriam”, Research in Phenomenology, Vol. 37, No. 2/2007, 175-194.
3. Erickson, Millard J., Truth and Consequence: The Promise and Perils of Postmodernism, IVP Academic, Downers Grove 2001.
4. Derrida, Jacques, “ How to avoid speaking denials”, Derrida and Negative Theology, ed. H. Coward- T. Foshay, State University of New York Press, Albany1992, 73- 142.
5. Derrida, Jacques, Positions, trans. Alan Bass, Athlone Press, Chicago 1981.
6. Dilthey, William, Hermeneutik ve Tin Bilimleri, çev. D. Özlem, İnkılap Yayınevi, İstanbul 1999.
7. Foster, Hal, “Postmodernism: A Preface”, Anti- Easthetic Essays on Postmodern Culture, ed. Hal Foster, Bay Press, Washingon 1983, IX- XIV. Foucault, Michel, Aesthetics, Method, And Epistemology, ed. James D. Faubion, trans. Robert Hurley, New Press, New York 1998.
8. Foucault, Michel, The Archaeology of Knowledge, trans. A. M. Sheridan Smith, Pantheon Books, New York 1972.

9. Foucault, Michel, The Birth of Clinic, trans. A. M. Sheridan Smith, Pantheon Books, New York 1973.
10. Foucault, Michel, The Politics of Truth, ed. Sylvere Lotringer, New York 1997.
11. Gadamer, Hans- Georg, “Easthetics and Hermeneutics”, Philosophical Hermeneutics, trans.-ed. David E. Linge, University of California Press, Berkeley- London 1977, 95- 104.
12. Gadamer, Hans- Georg, Hakikat ve Yöntem, çev. Hüsamettin Arslan, İsmail Yavuzcan, Paradigma Yayınevi, İstanbul 2008.
13. Gadamer, Hans-Georg, “Man and Language”, Philosophical Hermeneutics, trans.-ed. David E. Linge, University of California Press, Berkeley- London 1977, 59- 69.
14. Gadamer, Hans-Georg, “The Universality of the Hermeneutical Problem,” Philosophical Hermeneutics, trans. - ed. David E. Linge, University of California Press, Berkeley 1976, 3-17.
15. Gadamer, Hans Georg, Truth and Method, trans. Garret Barden- John Cumming, Crossroad, New York 1986.
16. Grondin, J., Introduction to Philosophical Hermeneutics, trans., J. Weinsheimer, Continum, London 1994.
17. Gutting, Gary, Michel Foucault- A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, New York 2005.
18. Habermas, Jürgen, “Modernity: An Incomplete Project”, Anti- Easthetic Essays on Postmodern Culture, ed. Hal Foster, Bay Press, Washingon 1983, 3-15.
19. Hill, Val,- Peter Every, “ Postmodernism and The Cinema”, The Icon Critical Dictionary of Postmodern Thought, ed. Stuart Sim, Routledge, Routldege, London- New York 2001, 101-111.
20. Hirsch, E. D., Validity in Interpretation, Yale University Press, New Haven 1967.
21. Hutcheon, Linda, A Poetics of Postmodernism: History, Theory, Fiction, Routledge, London-New York 1988.
22. Kale, Nesrin, “ Postmodernizm- Hermeneutik ve Eğitim”, Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 1971/28, 281- 292.
23. King, Ursula, “Historical and Phenomenological Approaches to the Study of Religion”, Contemporaray Approaches to The Study of Religion, ed. Frank Whaling, Mouton Publishers, Moulton Publishers, Berling- New York 1983, vol I, 29- 164.
24. Lewis, Berry, “Postmodern and Literature”, The Icon Critical Dictionary of Postmodern Thought, The Icon Critical Dictionary of Postmodern Thought, ed. Stuart Sim, Routledge, London- New York 2001, 121- 133.
25. Lubeck, Ray, “Trajectories in Postmodern Hermeneutics”, Northwest, 8 (March 1997), 1-8.
26. Lyotard, Jean- Francois, The Post- Modern Condition, trans. G. Bennington- Brain Massumi, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis 1984.
27. McCutcheon, Russell T., “Myth”, Guide to the Study of Religion, ed. Willi Braun- Russell T. McCutcheon, Continuum, London- New York 2000, 190-208.
28. Marsh, James L., “The Post-Modern Interpretation of History: A Phenomenological-Hermenutical Critique”, Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology, 19/2( May 1988), 112- 127.
29. Neaman, Elliot Yale, “Liberalism and Post-Modern Hermeneutics”, Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society, 2/2-3 (1988), 149- 165. Palmer, E. Richard, “Postmodernity and Hermeneutics”, Boundry 2, 5/2 ( Winter 1977), 363- 394.
30. Palmer, E. Richard, “ Postmodern Hermeneutics and The Act of Reading”, Notre Dame English Journal, 15/3(Summer 1983), 55- 84.
31. Palmer, E. Richard, “Gadamer and Confucius: Some Possible Affinities”, Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 36/1, 81- 93.
32. Palmer, E. Richard, Hermeneutics: Interpretation Theory in Fr. D. E. Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Heidegger and Gadamer, Northwestern University Press, Evanston 1969.
33. Penner, Hans H., “Interpretation”, Guide to the Study of Religion, ed. Willi Braun- Russell T. McCutcheon, Continuum, London- New York 2000, 37- 71.
34. Penner, Hans H., “Why Does Semantics Matter to the Study of Religion?”, Method and Theory in the Study of Religion, 7/1995, 221-249.
35. Racevskis, Karlis, “The Postmodern Outlook For Hermeneutics”, Diacritics, Spring 1994, 78- 90.
36. Ricoeur, Paul, Interperation Theory: Discourse and the Surplus of Meaning, Texas Christian University Press, Forth Worth 1976.
37. Ricoeur, Paul, Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences, trans. and ed. John B. Thomson, Cambridge University Press, New York 1981.
38. Ricoeur, Paul, Lectures on Ideology and Utopia, ed. G. H. Taylor, Colombia University Press, New York 1986.
39. Ritivoi, Andrea Deciu, “Hermeneutics a Project of Liberation: The Concept of Tradition in Paul Ricoeur and Hans- Georg Gadamer, Gadamer and Ricoeur- Critical Horizons for Contemporary Hermeneutics, ed. Francis J. Mootz – George H. Taylor, Boomsbury Press, London-New York 2011, 63- 83.
40. Rasmussen, David, Mythic-Symbolic Language and Philosophical Anthropology- A Constructive Interpreatation of the Thought of Paul Ricoeur, Martinus Nijhoff Press, The Hauge 1971.
41. Sarup, Madan, Introductory Guide to Post-Structuralism and Postmodernism, Biddles Ltd., Leicester 1993.
42. Scheliermacher, Friedrich, Hermeneutics, ed. Heinz Kimmerle, trans. James Duke Jack Fortsman, The Handwritten Manuscripts, Missoula 1977. Sim, Stuart,” Names and Terms (Heiddeger, Martin)”,The Icon Critical Dictionary of Postmodern Thought, ed. Stuart Sim, Routledge, London- New York 2001, 276-277.
43. Taylor, George H., Francis J. Mootz, “Introduction”, Gadamer and Ricoeur- Critical Horizons for Contemporary Hermeneutics, ed. Francis J. Mootz – George H. Taylor, Bloomsbury Press, London- New York 2011, 1- 11.
44. Tatar, Burhanettin, Felsefî Hermenötik ve Yazarın Niyeti- Gadamer Versus Hirsch, Vadi Yayınları, Ankara 1999.
45. Toprak, M., Hermeneutik (Yorumbilgisi) ve Edebiyat, Bulut Yayınları, İstanbul 2003.
46. Westphal, Merold, “Th Dialectic of Belonging and Distanciation in Gadamer and Ricoeur”, Gadamer and Ricoeur- Critical Horizons for Contemporary Hermeneutics, ed. Francis J. Mootz – George H. Taylor, Bloomsbury Press, London- New York 2011, 43- 62.
47. Wodak, Ruth, “Complex Texts: Analysing Understanding, Explaining and Interpreting Meanings”, Discourse Studies- Special Issue on Hermeneutics and Discourse Analysis (October 2011),13/5, 623-633.
48. Zimmermann, Jens, “ Quo Vadis?: Literary Theory Beyond Postmodernism”, Christianity and Literature, 53/4 (Summer 2004), 495- 519.