Cultural Reader: Gadamer Between Relativism and Realism

Hans-Georg Gadamer is often accused of relativism. After all, his central claim—that all understanding is historically conditioned, shaped by tradition and prejudice—seems to undermine the possibility of objective truth. If every interpretation is bound to a horizon, does this not mean that truth is always relative to context, language, or culture? Gadamer consistently rejected this charge. His hermeneutics, he insisted, is not a slide into relativism but an account of how truth becomes available within the limits of human finitude.

The Challenge of Relativism

Modern philosophy often presents us with a stark choice: either affirm an “absolute” conception of reality, independent of any standpoint (the dream of objectivism), or surrender to the view that all truths are equally relative. Against this dichotomy, Gadamer occupies a middle ground. He agrees with relativists that there is no view from nowhere: every claim to knowledge emerges within history and language. Yet he denies that this makes truth arbitrary.

Truth as Event, Not Possession

For Gadamer, truth is not a timeless possession but an event that happens in understanding. When we interpret a text, engage in dialogue, or encounter tradition, we do not discover a neutral fact detached from us. Rather, we enter into a conversation in which meaning comes to presence. Truth here is dialogical: it takes shape in the fusion of horizons between past and present, interpreter and subject matter.

This does not mean that “anything goes.” Not all interpretations are equally valid. The hermeneutical process is governed by the subject matter itself—the Sache. In encountering Plato on justice, for example, we are not free to impose any meaning we wish. The dialogue with Plato constrains and guides us; it can even shatter our expectations. Thus, while all understanding is finite and situated, it is still answerable to something beyond our whims.

Realism Without Absolutism

Gadamer’s position may be called a “hermeneutic realism.” He affirms that reality addresses us and that truth can be disclosed, but he rejects the idea that this requires an Archimedean standpoint outside history. Reality is not a fixed object waiting to be mirrored; it is something that shows itself through dialogue, language, and interpretation.

In this sense, Gadamer’s realism is dynamic rather than static. It does not rest on metaphysical guarantees but on the lived practice of understanding. Each genuine encounter carries the possibility of truth, not as final certainty but as deepened orientation toward the world.

Why It Matters

By holding together realism and finitude, Gadamer offers a way out of the impasse between dogmatism and relativism. He reminds us that truth is neither absolute possession nor cultural construct alone, but an unfolding event of understanding. This vision preserves the seriousness of truth while honoring the historicity of human life.

In our own time—marked by polarized “absolutisms” and radical skepticism alike—Gadamer’s hermeneutics remains an invitation: to remain open, to test our prejudices, and to trust that, even within history and language, truth can still come to light.