|Interpretation: A) making statements about other statements, whereby the new statements of the vocabulary make use of the original statements and possibly introduce new vocabulary. If no new vocabulary is introduced, new information can be obtained by changing the syntactic elements.|
B) In logic, the insertion of values (objects) instead of the constants or free variables.
_____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments.
Expounding//interpretation/Freud/dream interpretation/psychoanalysis/Ricoeur: Interpretation refers to any understanding of meaning that is specifically directed at the ambiguous expressions: interpretation is the understanding of the double sense. >Sense/Ricoeur.
Interpretation/Symbol: we define each one in relation to the other. The symbol is a ambiguous linguistic expression that requires interpretation; interpretation is a work that aims to decipher the symbols.
Interpretation/sign/Ricoeur: (...) I will not claim to interpret the sensual sign if I understand what it says. The interpretation refers to an intentional structure of the second degree, which presupposes that a first sense is already constituted, where something is primarily meant, but this something refers to something else, which is only meant by it. >Sign/Ricoeur.
Interpretation/Tradition/Ricoeur: tradition [recommends] two different applications [of the concept of interpretation]; one proposes an interpretation concept that is too "short", the other is too "long"; these two variations in the extension of the concept of interpretation roughly reflect those variations we have considered in defining the symbol. >Symbol/Ricoeur.
Peri hermenias/Interpretation/Aristotle: provides a "too long" interpretation term:
Interpretation is every sound produced by the voice and carrying meaning - every
phoné semantiké, any phoné semantiké. In this sense, the noun in itself is an interpretation, and so is the verbum, because we say something with it; but the simple saying (phásis) is taken from the total meaning of the logos; the full meaning of the hermeneia appears, therefore, only with the complex saying, the sentence that Aristotle calls logos, and which includes the command, the wish, the request as well as the meaningful speech. The hermeneia, in its full sense, is the meaning of the sentence.
The fraction between the designation and the thing has already been made with the noun, and this distance marks the place of interpretation. Not every speech necessarily remains true;
it does not adhere to being; (...).
(...) the path for a hermeneutics of double meanings [seems] to be blocked; the concept of meaning demands the unambiguity of meaning: the definition of the principle of identity in the logical and ontological sense demands this unambiguity of meaning; (...).
Def Interpretation/Aristoteles: "to testify something about something".
Ricoeur: his discussion of the multiple meanings of being breaks through the purely logical and ontological theory of unambiguity.
Biblical exegesis/interpretation/tradition/Ricoeur: "short" concept of interpretation:
Hermeneutics/Tradition/Ricoeur: hermeneutics in this sense is the science of the rules of exegesis, whereby this is understood as the special interpretation of a text. (...) what has traditionally been called the "Four Senses of Scripture" forms the core of this hermeneutics; (...) In particular, the terms analogy, allegory, symbolic meaning were developed here; (...). This second tradition thus combines hermeneutics with the definition of the symbol through >analogy, without, however, reducing it exclusively to this.
What limits this definition of hermeneutics by exegesis is first of all that it refers to an authority, be it monarchical, collegial or clerical, e.g. in biblical hermeneutics as it is practiced within Christian communities; (...).
Middle Ages: The tradition of exegesis, however, offers a good starting point for our company: the concept of text itself can indeed be understood in an analogous sense; the Middle Ages could speak of an interpretatio naturae, thanks to the metaphor of the Book of Nature; (...). This concept of "text" frees us from that of writing. >Interpretation of dreams/Freud/Ricoeur.
Nietzsche: with him, the entire philosophy becomes interpretation.
Ricoeur: This path is connected with the new problem of imagination.
NietzscheVsKant/Ricoeur: It is no longer about the Kantian question whether a subjective idea can have objective validity.
Freud: for him it is not only a "script" of interpretation, but any set of signs that can be considered as a text to be deciphered, i.e. a dream or a neurotic symptom as well as a rite, a myth, a work of art, a content of faith. Must we not therefore return to our concept of symbol as a double sense, without already knowing whether the double sense is concealment or revelation, a lie of life or access to the sacred? >Sense/Ricoeur, >Hermeneutics/Ricoeur.
Interpretation as exercise of doubt: [the 'school of doubt' is dominated by Marx, Nietzsche and Freud]. It is relatively easy to see that these three undertakings have in common with each other to question the primacy of the "object" in our conception of the sacred as well as the "fulfilment" of the goal of the sacred by a kind of analogia entis, which is supposed to link us to being by virtue of an assimilatory intention.
Looking back at their common intention, one finds in it the decision to regard consciousness as a whole as "false" consciousness. From here, each in a different area, they take up again the problem of the Cartesian doubt, in order to carry it to the centre of the Cartesian Fortress itself. After the doubt, we have now entered into the doubt of consciousness. >Hermeneutics/Ricoeur._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
De L’interprétation. Essai sur Sigmund Freud
Die Interpretation. Ein Versuch über Freud Frankfurt/M. 1999
Interpretation theory: discourse and the surplus of meaning Fort Worth 1976