<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE ArticleSet PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD PubMed 2.7//EN" "https://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/ncbi/pubmed/in/PubMed.dtd">
<ArticleSet>
<Article>
<Journal>
				<PublisherName>Iranian Institute for Social &amp; Cultural Research</PublisherName>
				<JournalTitle>Journal of Iranian Cultural Research</JournalTitle>
				<Issn>2008-1847</Issn>
				<Volume>1</Volume>
				<Issue>4</Issue>
				<PubDate PubStatus="epublish">
					<Year>2009</Year>
					<Month>02</Month>
					<Day>21</Day>
				</PubDate>
			</Journal>
<ArticleTitle>Hermeneutics and the Historicity of Human Understanding</ArticleTitle>
<VernacularTitle>Hermeneutics and the Historicity of Human Understanding</VernacularTitle>
			<FirstPage>159</FirstPage>
			<LastPage>184</LastPage>
			<ELocationID EIdType="pii">26</ELocationID>
			
<ELocationID EIdType="doi">10.7508/ijcr.2008.04.008</ELocationID>
			
			<Language>FA</Language>
<AuthorList>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Gholamreza</FirstName>
					<LastName>Jamshidnia</LastName>
<Affiliation>Associate Professor of Sociology, University of Tehran</Affiliation>

</Author>
<Author>
					<FirstName>Vahid</FirstName>
					<LastName>Shalchi</LastName>
<Affiliation>PhD Candidate of Cultural Sociology, University of Tehran</Affiliation>

</Author>
</AuthorList>
				<PublicationType>Journal Article</PublicationType>
		<Abstract>Whether objectivity in the understanding of history is achivable? Putting  in another way, whether it is possible to account a historical event purely objectively, and free of one&#039;s own values, attitudes, and interests? Whether it is possible to have a &quot;complete history&#039;&#039; and a complete explanation of any historical matter? If it is not possible, then it necessarily leads to a relativistic approach which finds any historical narrative acceptable? Are there any criteria according to which one could compare truthfulness of various historical narratives? The present study approach these questions hermeneutically. However, not all hermeneutical approaches answer them alike. Denying the relativist approach, this study attempts to analyze historicity of the human understanding and that of the interpreter him/herself.</Abstract>
			<OtherAbstract Language="FA">Whether objectivity in the understanding of history is achivable? Putting  in another way, whether it is possible to account a historical event purely objectively, and free of one&#039;s own values, attitudes, and interests? Whether it is possible to have a &quot;complete history&#039;&#039; and a complete explanation of any historical matter? If it is not possible, then it necessarily leads to a relativistic approach which finds any historical narrative acceptable? Are there any criteria according to which one could compare truthfulness of various historical narratives? The present study approach these questions hermeneutically. However, not all hermeneutical approaches answer them alike. Denying the relativist approach, this study attempts to analyze historicity of the human understanding and that of the interpreter him/herself.</OtherAbstract>
		<ObjectList>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Explanation</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Hermeneutics</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Historicity</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Historical Sociology</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Relativism</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">Romantic Hermeneutics</Param>
			</Object>
			<Object Type="keyword">
			<Param Name="value">New Hermeneutics</Param>
			</Object>
		</ObjectList>
<ArchiveCopySource DocType="pdf">http://www.jicr.ir/article_26_4e732ced3463d06de0ca9a15b6153677.pdf</ArchiveCopySource>
</Article>
</ArticleSet>
