Gadamer and Pannenberg

Abstract

Theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg, in his response to Hans-Georg Gadamer’s Wahrheit Und Methode, challenged his hermeneutics by noting the following two things. First, Gadamer discusses the “speculative element” of language, emphasizing “the infinity of what is not said” behind words, and in doing so, according to Pannenberg, disregards the “statement” (Aussage) as a form of language, which enables a sentence to unequivocally designate and describe an objective state of affairs. Although this criticism itself is valid, this is not a problem of “either/ or”. The two aspects of language they put forward should be in a reciprocal relationship. Second, Pannenberg argued that Gadamer’s hermeneutics and his concept of a “fusion of horizons” necessarily merge into Pannenberg’s own theological program, namely universal history. Being convinced that history should always include the horizon of the future, this philosopher could not agree to the theologian’s program, perhaps because it presupposes the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth as an objective historical fact.