The Un-Neutrality of Questions

How do we come to pose our questions? When we pose them, how do we go about answering them? No problem just falls from heaven. Something awakens our interest—that is really what comes first! At the beginning of every effort to understand is a concern about something: confronted by a question one is to answer, one’s knowledge of what one is interpreting is thrown into uncertainty, and this causes one to search for an answer. In order to come up with an answer, the person then begins asking questions. But no one asks questions von sich aus [just from oneself]—apropos of nothing. To think otherwise is simply to fall into scientific ideology. No, understanding is not something that takes place at the end of humanistic research about an object, it stands at the beginning and governs the whole process of questioning, step by step. –Gadamer in Conversation, 50

God’s Law vs. Man’s Law?

I’m curious about this paragraph:

What! The flaw in the cuirass of society could be found by a magnanimous wretch! What! An honest servant of the law could find himself suddenly caught between two crimes, the crime of letting a man escape, and the crime of arresting him! All was not certain in the order given by the state to the official! There might be blind alleys in duty! What then! Was all that real! Was it true that an old bandit, weighed down by condemnations, could rise up and be right at last? Was this credible? Were there cases then the law ought, before a transfigured crime, to retire, stammering excuses?

Yes, there were! And Javert saw it! and Javert touched it! and not only could he not deny it, but he took part in it. They were realities. It was abominable that real facts could reach such deformity.” –Les Miserables

Hugo wants us to think that Valjean should be released from his lifetime penalty. He wants us to feel that it’s wrong for Flavert to capture him. Is he right in doing this?