| Legal hermeneutics, as compared to legal interpretation, is the understanding of the law according to a judge's own attitude. Understanding is the communion between the text of law and the interpreter, in which process the judges internally create the standards of judgment and attempts to overturn the traditional theory of legal interpretation that seeks, with the help of various methods, the identity between judgment and the text of law. However, legal hermeneutics has also been sharply criticized for，
abandoning the standards of textual interpretation of law, ignoring the intentions of the authors of the text of law and attaching too much importance to the subjective attitude of the interpreter. Therefore, the two theories on the interpretation of the law, one stressing the content, the other emphasizing the method, are both indispensable. Interpretation without hermeneutics tends to lack in substance whereas hermeneutics without interpretation tends to be blind. |
京公网安备11010102006664号 京ICP备2023015853号