Literalism, Originalism, Interpretation

Spinoza's pioneering reading of Scripture as metaphorical is grounded in his thesis that all symbolic knowledge is contingent, and, hence, is inadequate. His system also entails a further critique of 'Literalism'--his proposition that knowledge of external objects is always fundamentally knowledge of corporeal modification, when applied to linguistic objects, implies that such knowledge is always fundamentally interpretive. That insight is developed by, notably, Gadamer, who shows that there is no access to a text independent of the antecedent conditions of the reader, i. e. independent of perspective, and, possibly, of prejudice. So, even if it is granted that Scripture is the 'exact word of God', a premise difficult in its own right to prove, that it can be read as 'what God intended' requires an Epistemological theory that usually seems lacking. A similar analysis applies to 'Originalist' claims regarding the reading of the U. S. Constitution--as is the case with Literalism, question-begging solemnity is no substitute for sound theory, even when supported by the threat of violence.