Hermeneutics has a long history which can still learn a lot. At the beginning stands the Aristotelian treatise of the same name, which deals with, basically, the logic of the sentence. The way the modern use the term "hermeneutics" refers generally to special disciplines. Thus, we find a legal and theological hermeneutics and, ultimately, the old word "hermeneutics" has the connotation of the universal sense of translation. But true universality could only be associated with this concept when metaphysics was approached its end and its claim to monopoly against modern science was restricted. Wilhelm Dilthey was especially who took an important step in this direction with his descriptive psychology. But only when Dilthey and his school came to have a greater influence on the movement, was not merely understand and next to the understanding and clarify and, in general, was not limited to use in science. Rather, understanding is the fundamental structure of human existence, what comes to be at the heart of philosophy. In this way lose its primacy of subjectivity and self-consciousness, which Husserl still find expression in the transcendental ego. In its place comes another, which is no longer object to the subject, but it is in a relationship and experiential language exchange with the other. Therefore, understanding is not a method but a way of living among those who understand. This opens a dimension by which certain other special areas of possible knowledge does not play a role parallel or equivalent, but this dimension is the practice of life itself. This does not exclude that precisely the methods of science also go their own way, which is the objectification of the affairs of their research. But right here there are also the dangers of a theoretical limitation of science, which involves avoiding certain experiences related to another human being other words, other texts and their claim to validity due to methodological complacency. Consider just a few steps forward, for example, in elucidating the structural grammar of myth, which was invested enormous energy research, and certainly not for the purpose and outcome of the myth now start talking better. Something similar could be said of semantics, which takes as its object the world of signs or textuality, to which scientific knowledge has succeeded in approaching new and interesting way. But hermeneutics does not claim objectivity, but listen to each other, and also, for example, listening to someone who can tell. That's where it starts imponderable which we refer to when human beings are understood.