The guiding question in this essay is, how might we speak of silence—interpret silence—without objectifying it and losing a sense of it in the way we speak of it. That means that prioritizing the value of direct linguistic language, comprehension (i.e. constructing a conceptual grasp), interpreting what other hermeneuts say about silence, or attempting to make it visible is not a viable option. The myths of Hermes and Metis, however, might be integral to the lineages of speaking and knowing that are more suited to speaking of silence than the lineages that arise out of biblical exegesis and modern/contemporary philosophy and theology. In the process of shifting to the value of those myths, the bonding of truth and goodness with stability and moral decency is displaced by the value of uncertainty and indirection. Throughout, the essay accepts the distinction between silences and silence and prioritizes awareness of silence in the silence accompanying awareness.

本文中的指导性问题是，我们如何能在不客观化和以我们所说的方式失去对沉默的理解的情况下谈论沉默（解释沉默）。这意味着优先考虑直接语言语言的价值，理解（即建立概念上的理解），解释其他解释对沉默的看法或试图使其变得可见是不可行的选择。但是，爱马仕和梅蒂斯的神话可能是说和知的世系不可或缺的组成部分，比起圣经的训sis学，现代/当代哲学和神学所产生的世系，更适合沉默。在转变为这些神话的价值的过程中，不确定性和间接价值取代了真理与善与稳定与道德品格的结合。自始至终，