科學的認知能力並非是獲至真理的唯一路途，藝術經驗也是另一個非方法的理解方式。高達美以遊戲理論為存有論的基礎，企圖清楚的指涉出傳統主客對立思維模式之下對事物認識不足，認為藝術作品的理解經驗可以補充此一不足。因此Gadamer肯定藝術經驗是存有真理的顯現，而藝術經驗則是由藝術作品本身和欣賞者的理解所共同完成的，因此，對於真理並不是只有一種理解的方式。Gadamer透過對遊戲的分析，說明遊戲經驗所代表的藝術作品理解方式是具有可行性的。
在高達美的分析中，遊戲的主要特徵在於：自為的主體活動，遊戲的自我表現及遊戲是一來回往返的活動，說明遊戲者與遊戲之間的互動，一如藝術作品與觀賞者之間的互動，作品向觀賞者展開，觀賞者帶著自身的視域來理解作品，在理解的過程中，作品與觀賞者的視域交融，達成視域融合。對Gadamer而言，融合的過程就是藝術作品的理解過程同時也是真理開顯的過程。

The cognitive ability of science is not the only way to acquire the truth. The experience of art is another non-method way to understand. Gadamer’s theory of playing is based on ontology, and he attempts to point out the inadequacy understanding of subjective and objective. Thinking the inadequacy can supple by the understanding experience of artwork. He is sure that the experience of art is strongly truth appearance. And a experience of art is constituted by the artwork and the understating of spectator. Therefore, there is not only way to understating the truth. After the playing analysis, it shows that understanding can be practice by art experience.
In Gadamer, the main characteristics of playing: activities of subject, self-evident, and back and forth. This concept described in detail how interaction between playing and player. It likes artwork and spectator. The artwork opens its world to spectator. The Spectator is trying to understand the artwork world by his own horizons. In this process, the spectator’s horizon and artwork world are fused together. For Gadamer, the fusion means understanding of artwork, and it is also a truth revealment process.

西文
1. Gadamer, Hans-Georg, 1989, Hermeneutik I: Wahrheit und Methode-Grundzüge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik,Gesammelte Werke, Band1, Tübingen: J. B. C. Mohr.
2. -----, 1977, Die Aktualitat des Schonen, Phillip Reclam Jr., Stuttgrat.
3. -----, Joel Weinsheimer and Donald Marshall (tr.), 1989, Truth and Method, 2nd revised edition New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company.
4. -----, Robert Bernasconi and Nichoalas Walker (tr. and ed.), 1980, The Relevence of the Beautiful and other essays, London: Cambridge University Press.
5. -----, Kathleen Wright (ed.), 1990, Festivals of interpretation : essays on Hans-Georg Gadamer''s work, N.Y.: State University of New York Press.
6. -----, Jeff Malpas, Ulrich Arnswald and Jens Kertcher (eds.), 2002, Gadamer’s Century Essays in Honor of Hans-Georg Gadamer, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
7. -----, John M. Connolly and Thomas Keutner (trs.), 1988, Hermeneutics Versus Science? Indiana: University of Notre Dame press.
8. -----, Joel Weinsheimer (tr.), 1999, Hermeneutics, religion, and ethics. New Haven, CT :Yale University Press.
9. -----, David E. Linge (tr.), 1977, Philosophical Hermeneutics, LA: University of California press.
10. -----, Chris Dawson (tr.), 1998, Praise of theory: speeches and essays, New Haven: Yale Universtiy Press.
11. -----, Frederick G. Lawrence (tr.), 1993, Reason in the Age of Science, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
12. -----, Lewis Edwin Hahn (ed.), 1997, The philosophy of Hans-Georg Gadamer, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University.
13. Dutt, Carsten, 2000, Hermeneutik-Ästhetik-praktische Philosophie: Hans-Georg Gadamer im Gespräch / hrsg. von Carsten Dutt, Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter Heidelberg GmbH.
14. -----, Richard E. Palmer, (ed. and tr.), 2001, Gadamer in conversation : reflections and commentary / Hans-Georg Gadamer; with Carsten Dutt...[et al.], New Haven: Yale University Press.
15. Hirsch, Eric Donald, 1967, Validity in interpretation, New York: Yale University Press.
16. Kant, Immanuel, J. H. Bernard (tr.), 1931, Kant''s Critique of Judgement, London: Macmillan.
17. Schiller, Friedrich, Elizabeth M. Wilkinson and L.A. Willoughby (tr.), 1982, On The Aesthetic Education Of Man, Translated with London: Oxford Clarendon Press, 1982.
18. Grondin, Jean, Kathryn Plant (tr.), 2003, The Philosophy of Gadamer, London:Acumen Publisching Limited.
19. Weinsheimer, Joel. C., 1985, Gadamer’s Hermeneutics: A Reading of Truth and Method, New Haven: Yale University Press.
20. Sullivan, Robert R., 1989, Political Hermeneutics: The Early Thinking of Hans-Georg Gadamer, University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
21. Rorty, Richard, 1979, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
22. Altenbernd, Johnson Patricia, 2000, On Gadamer. C.A.: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.
中文書目
1. 《劍橋哲學辭典》，2002年，台北：貓頭鷹出版社。
2. 洪漢鼎（等編譯），Habermas Jüergen, Paul Ricoeur, Hans-Georg Gadamer （等著），2005年，《詮釋學經典文選（上）（下）》，台北：桂冠圖書股份有限公司。
3. 王慶節，陳嘉映（譯），Heidegger, Martin （著），2002年，《存在與時間》(Sein und Zeit)，台北： 桂冠圖書股份有限公司。
4. Michelfelder, Diane P. and Richard E. Palmer (eds.), Forget, Philippe (tr.), 孫周興，孫善春（編譯），2004年，《德法之爭：伽達默爾與德里達的對話》(Dialogue and Deconstruction: The Gadamer-Derrida Encounter)，上海：同濟大學出版社。
5. 陸敬忠著，2004年，《哲學詮釋學﹣歷史、義理與對話之「生化」辯證》，台北：五南圖書公司。
英文期刊
1. Seerveld, Calvin, 1978, “Reviewed Work(s): Turth and Method” in The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 489-490.
2. Zuniga, Joaquin, 1991, “Reviewed Work(s): The Relevance of the Beautiful and Other Essays”in Noûs , Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 139-142.
3. Crowther, Paul, 1983, “Review: The Experience of Art: Some Problems and Possibilities of Hermeneutical Analysis” in Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 347-362.
4. Bernstein, Richard J., 1988, “Reviewed Work(s): The Relevance of the Beautiful and Other Essays”in The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. Vol. 46, No. 3 pp. 421-423.
5. Dostal, Robert J., 1980, “Kantian Aesthetics and the Literary Criticism of E. D. Hirsch” in The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 299-305.
6. Shusterman, Richard, 1997, “The End of Aesthetic Experience” in The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 29-41.
7. Dorter, Kenneth, 1990, “Concept Truth and Aesthetics Truth” in The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. Vol. 48, No. 1, pp. 37-51.
中文期刊
1. 張鼎國，1997，〈海德格、高達美與希臘人〉，哲學雜誌編委會主編，《哲學雜誌》第21期，台灣：業強出版社，頁98-125。
2. 張鼎國，1997，〈義理詮釋、自我理解與文化診療〉，國立中央大學文學院哲學研究所編，《應用哲學與文化治療學術研討會論文集》，中壢：國立中央大學文學院哲學研究所，頁77-96。
3. 陳榮華，2002，〈從海德格的存在時間(existentiall time)到高達美的充實時間(fulfilled time)〉，哲學雜誌編委會主編，《哲學雜誌》第38期，台灣：業強出版社，頁98-115。
4. 陳榮華，1998，〈高達美《真理與方法》中的完整性先前概念(Vorgiff der Vollkommenheit)與真理概念〉 ， 國立臺灣大學臺大文史哲學報編輯委員會， 《文史哲學報》 第49期，台北： 國立臺灣大學出版委員會，頁3-78。
5. 陳榮華，2000，〈論高達美詮釋學的文本與詮釋之統一性〉 ， 國立臺灣大學臺大文史哲學報編輯委員會， 《文史哲學報》 第52期，台北： 國立臺灣大學出版委員會，頁1-297。
6. 陸敬忠，2000，〈高達美詮釋學與黑格爾辯證法－綜論高達美哲學詮釋學生成史中之黑格爾思想〉，彭文林編，《國立政治大學哲學學報》第6期，台北： 國立政治大學哲學系，頁135-172。