本篇論文基本上是回顧性處理曾發生於歐陸四大思想家Gadamer、Apel、Habermas、 和Ricoeur之間的，關於詮釋學與意識型態批判理論的若干爭論，探討其間兩方的主要歧異， 及其對各自日後的哲學進路之決定性形響。但由於篇幅和時間的限制，本文探索的重點先放 置在哲學詮釋學與批判理論早期往復相質疑的論述條理上，盡可能參閱第一手的討論資料， 以釐清雙方各自所重的哲學目標與學術企圖，作為比較其思想差異的對照標準，因而時間上 則暫以Ricoeur和Gadamer二人發生於1982年的相關對話為止，如此經由Ricoeur調和仲介 的立場比對下，正好可以明確顯見出本文觀察考核所得的一項主要論點，亦即:極為尊崇傳 統、重視權威的高達美詮釋學，原本就著重於有限個人對歷史文化的歸屬感，因此極為強調 對話參與、視域融合的問答邏輯，期望藉此維繫意義理解的連續性，並彰顯實效歷史的主動 性。與此相對的，年輕一代的意織型態批判理論者，卻從一開始就要追尋一種更高效力的， 能滿足解放效果的人類知識旨趣，亦即近代西方啟蒙主義以來所講求的知識效果，讓理性持 續透過反思式自我批判而趨向自主與成熟的進步。

　　　　　In this paper I study retrospectively the debate between philosophical hermeneutics of Hans-Georg Gadamer on the one hand and the critique of ideology or critical theory on the other hand. As regard to a new approach in the methodology of social sciences, Karl-Otto Apel and Jurgen Habermas, who are two most important representatives of the latter camp, take a different way from that of hermeneutics. Although this debate happened in the later 60s and early 70s, its effects last till the whole 80s, and even the philosophical discussions today are still under its inspirations. In Gadamer's hermeneutics, the great traditions are revitalized again through our interpretive participation, which serves itself as a part of traditions and even uphold actively in their continuation. Gadamer tends to keep the good things going on for us rather than to put them under severe examination. The traditional values could be transmitted and conveyed into the present in living dialogues, with respect to the continuity of history in this way. But the critical theorists of younger generation appreciate this conservative approach very little. Their early attacks on Gadamer show their further development toward a intersubjectively more interactive communication theory, which steps progressively on a post-conventional level, and can therefore fulfill their social task better and more confidently. In the final part, I introduce the French philosopher Paul Ricoeur as a very qualified mediator between the two parties, although his own thought counts as a new version of hermeneutics too. His critique of Gadamer's "hermeneutics of recollection" makes some convincing points from the side of critique of ideology on Gadamer even more acceptable. Ricoeur concludes that the cultural tradition and the critique of ideology are not to be treated separately. A conclusion that Gadamer will finally agree, either.