李克爾的行動解釋學

Paul Ricoeur's Hermeneutics of Action

10.6995/JCTU.200801.0133

張展源(Chan-Yuan Chang)

言說 ； 文本 ； 行動 ； 解釋學拱門 ； 結構主義 ； Discourse ； Text ； Action ； Hermeneutic Arc ； Structuralism

建國科大學報

27卷2期（2008 / 01 / 01）

133 - 161

繁體中文

本論文主要介紹、解釋、並反省李克爾關於行動之解釋學分析，主要的文獻是依據其早期之〈文本的模式：有意義之行動作爲文本〉一文，但也擴及其晚期之《時間與敘事文》和《自我作爲他者》兩本書中關於行動之相關論述。 基本上李克爾仍運用其文本解釋學中的「解釋學拱門」之理論來分析行動，而主張要分別從「理解到說明」與「說明到理解」的兩個進路來解釋行動。 本文基本上同意李克爾對行動之分析的第一個進路，即「理解到說明」是一種「猜測到驗證」的過程，但也質疑他的第二個進路，即從結構主義式之說明過渡到社會行動之理解的進路，過於模糊，缺乏實際之舉例，因而降低了它的可運用性。

This essay introduces, interprets, and criticizes Paul Ricoeur's hermeneutics of action. It focuses on Ricoeur's early essay, ”The Model of Text: Meaningful Action Considered as a Text,” but it also covers Ricoeur's analysis of action presented in both Time and Narrative and Oneself as Another. Basically, Ricoeur applies his theory of ”hermeneutic arc” in the realm of hermeneutics of text to his analysis of action, arguing that we need to interpret actions with two complementary approaches: one, the ”from understanding to explanation” approach; the other, the ”from explanation to understanding” approach, which relies on the result of structuralism. This essay basically agrees with Ricoeur's claim, that the ”from understanding to explanation” approach is essentially the process of guessing to vindication. However, it is argued that Ricoeur's second approach, the process from the structuralistic explanation to the understanding of social actions, is very vague and without clear exemplification, and this vagueness degrades the applicability of his theory to the analysis of social actions.