Philosophical Hermeneutics versus Hermeneutics of Suspicion: Fierce Enemies or Close Allies?

In our age, hermeneutics, defined as the art and science of interpretation, is the subject of research in critical communication theories, one of the sub-headings of contemporary political philosophy. The two main axes of this framework are intertextual dialogic discussions and communicative action and dialogic endeavor in the intersubjective dimension. The common theme of these two axes centers on language. The prominent role of language has transformed the hermeneutic approach into one of the main concerns of political theory. On this axis, Hans-Georg Gadamer and Jürgen Habermas’ work on hermeneutics offers us an important perspective for understanding the structure of this orientation in relation to communication debates. This study aims to show how the hermeneutic approach can be significant for today’s world, based on the conclusions reached after comparing the approaches of the two thinkers. For this purpose, first, Gadamer’s philosophical hermeneutical approach and his understanding of dialogue will be addressed. Then, early Habermas’ interpretation of intersubjectivity in the context of the hermeneutics of suspicion (or critical hermeneutics) and his basic criticisms of hermeneutical sciences within the scope of this interpretation will be focused on. Finally, the study will conclude with a critical evaluation by including the basic claims of the debate known as the Habermas-Gadamer debate in the literature.