Abstract: There exist remarkable differences between Gadamer's and Ricoeur's understandings of the concepts "truth" and "method." Ricoeur believes that Gadamer's hermeneutics brings about the disjuncture of hermeneutic truth, while Gadamer holds that Ricoeur's structuralist method cannot integrate the conflicts of interpretations into a unified ontology. This paper points out that both philosophers develop their theories of truth on the basis of Heidegger's hermeneutical ontology, but in different ways. Gadamer focuses on the truth of understanding disclosed in the event of hermeneutic dialogue, while Ricoeur emphasizes the truth of self-understanding mediated by hermeneutic reflection. Both philosophers keep similar distance from the absolute truth by emphasizing the historiticity of understanding and the openness of hermeneutic experience, and neither stops at claiming himself to be a Hedeggerian only. Instead, both attempt to move from Heidegger's radical ontology back to different types of "the science of spirit" (Geisteswissenschaften), offering their own defense for the unique truth of the science of spirit.  

Key words: Gadamer, Ricoeur, truth, method, "science of spirit"