The following text discusses hermeneutics.
Gadamer's philosophical hermeneutics rejected method-centered approaches to interpretation. Understanding, he argued, involves a "fusion of horizons"—the interpreter's present perspective engaging with the text's historical horizon. Prejudice, rather than an obstacle to knowledge, constitutes understanding's enabling condition. Critics worried this position undermined textual objectivity and the critical stance necessary for ideology critique.
Which choice best describes the overall structure of the text?
It provides step-by-step instructions for literary analysis.
It presents Gadamer's hermeneutic theory and notes concerns about its implications.
It argues that all interpretation is merely subjective opinion.
It compares German and French approaches to textual analysis.
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the best answer. The text presents Gadamer's theory (fusion of horizons, productive prejudice) and notes critical concerns (objectivity, ideology critique).
- Evidence: The text presents the theory: "Gadamer's... 'fusion of horizons'... Prejudice... constitutes understanding's enabling condition." It notes concerns: "Critics worried this position undermined textual objectivity and the critical stance."
- Reasoning: The structure is Theory (Prejudice is good) -> Critique (But what about objectivity?).
- Conclusion: This matches "presents Gadamer's hermeneutic theory and notes concerns."
💡 Strategy: Track the flow: Fusion/Prejudice (Theory) -> Is that dangerous? (Critique).
Choice A is incorrect because instructions aren't provided. Choice C is incorrect because Gadamer's view is more nuanced. Choice D is incorrect because national approaches aren't compared.