![Electronic Theses and Dissertations](../../assets/md5images/8bf39a2f649bfcc97f3e39e2323994d5.png)
Date of Award
1-1-2022
Document Type
Thesis
Degree Name
M.A. in Philosophy
First Advisor
Neil A. Manson
Second Advisor
Timothy P. Yenter
Third Advisor
Steven Skultety
School
University of Mississippi
Relational Format
dissertation/thesis
Abstract
There are two groups which claim that proper textual interpretation does not require extratextual information. They posit that the meaning of texts is discoverable from the words of the text and/or an individual's reason alone. Thus, no extratextual information is required to arrive at a cogent and coherent interpretation. The medieval Karaites reject the notion that there is any such thing as interpretive precedent and everyone's interpretation, when guided by reason, is as valid and coherent as anyone else's. Early Protestant Reformers such as John Calvin and Martin Luther argue that all one needs to interpret the Bible is the text, and assistance from the Holy Spirit. I argue against both positions. I show that these two separate interpretive frameworks, both of which exclude extratextual information, yield interpretive results that are incoherent and contradictory. I argue that this is because interpretable texts themselves cannot exist without a causal chain of interpretation. Therefore, by the time an interpreter interprets a text, a vast amount of extratextual information has already been smuggled in. Thus, the very act of interpretation employs extratextual information, whether or not the interpreter believes that extratextual information is required to interpret a text.
Recommended Citation
Roberts, Menashe Chaim, "Karaites & Reformers: Two Failed Cases of Coherent Interpretation" (2022). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 2455.
https://egrove.olemiss.edu/etd/2455
Concentration/Emphasis
Philosophy