چکیده:
The famous theory in the field of meaning and text interpretation is called 'intentionalism,' which posits that 'the intentions of the author are related to the meaning of the work or its interpretation.' In recent decades, a theory that stands in opposition to this famous theory, known as 'anti-intentionalism' or in its more radical form, the 'death of the author' theory, has increasingly grown. In this article, a set of the most important anti-intentionalist arguments against intentionalists, titled 'the inaccessibility of the author's intentions,' are examined. Through numerous reasons and evidence, it is shown that these arguments lack a solid foundation and that intentions, in the true sense (phenomenological intentions), are accessible matters.
خلاصه ماشینی:
169-194 Investigating the Possibility of Accessing the Author's Intentions{o*o} A Critique of Anti-Intentionalist Hermeneutics and the Theory of the Death of the Author Alireza Abedi Sarasiya{o1o} PhD graduate in Jurisprudence and Foundations of Islamic Law, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad Email: Al-ibada@75 yahoo.
ir Abstract {IBThe famous theory regarding meaning and text interpretation is called "Intentionalism," according to which "the intentions of the author are related to the meaning of the work or its interpretation.
A moderate anti-intentionalist may believe in some kind of agency and origin in the meaning of the work for the author, but does not consider discovering their intention to be possible or desirable.
The interference of preconditions is an unconscious, unavoidable, and necessary matter and, in fact, has made the structure of human existence and consequently his understanding and preconditions "cultural deposits and trusts that have reached us"; that is, what is called "tradition"{o2o} in Gadamer's{o1o} terminology.
Critique 2: The Possibility of Correcting and Modifying Preconceptions In the author's view, to respond to objections regarding preconceptions, there is no need to deny the unconscious and necessary intervention of preconceptions, especially since, in addition to new theories regarding the nature of mind or understanding, the human conscious conscience also proves the unconscious intervention of preconceptions; just as, fundamentally, for the difference in understandings of a specific text, no reason more valid than the difference in preconceptions can be found.
In understanding the intentions of others, what is intended is these common linguistic meanings and not the personal conceptions of the author that they were not attempting to express.
(
, 
, 
)
