Özet:

It is a fact that human beings have different thoughts. Each eye is a view, each view is an angle, and each angle is a different interpretation. Human has been looking at philosophical gaze into the world since the very beginning of the adventure of the creation of this world. Since every angle has its own view, every view naturally is of the opinion that its own view is true. Because without view, there is no perspective. Hereby, the various interpretations are the fact of human nature. This natural process, however, requires that the nature of the root meaning is not be ignored, and that the position of the fundamental meaning reveals the necessity of its originally formed conditions. Because of this, consistent meanings lead to interpretation difficulties in the process of reception. Since ancient times, philosophers / litterateur have tried to explain closed meanings of textual subjects according to their own worldviews and periodic feature, and even among themselves many different interpretations (perception forms and evaluations) have emerged for the same topics. In order to overcome this problem, different ways of understanding and inferencing theories have been put forward. Different interpretation methods have been established with factors such as reason, observation, intuitive perception, periodic conditions, interpreter's abilities, language case and textual context. Platon in this regard says: "People can not perceive the truth completely and can not be far from it. In this context, elephant metaphor is a striking example. Accordingly, Socrates express the following statement: "If the matter of dispute is known, every dispute ends." This study was elaborated to draw attention to the awareness criteria that the textual meaning can be evaluated by the recepteur in different perspectives in the interpretation and communication processes. By using comparison and sampling methods, some examination for the reader has been expressed.

Anahtar Kelimeler: