The aim of the dissertation is to demonstrate the hermeneutic structure of scientific inquiry via hermeneutic phenomenological assumptions and to define the fundamental factors that constitute this structure, i.e. factors which are not a product of convention. The structure is defined as the hermeneutic circle, a principle which explains the anticipation of meaning as the product of the 'forestructure'. In science, this applies to the process of planning and conducting scientific inquiries based on pre-established conditions which determine the course of the inquiry in every aspect. Hermeneutic phenomenological approach to analyzing natural sciences and empirical inquiry emerged only half a century ago in the form of the so called ‘hermeneutics of science’, which laid the ground for such analyses, but they are yet to be fully explored. The aim of this dissertation is to contribute to this approach by analyzing the structure of the scientific inquiry via the hermeneutic circle. Following the theory of the hermeneutics of science and arguing against conventionalist explanations of scientific method found in postpositivism and sociology of scientific knowledge, the fundamental structure of scientific inquiry – explained via the hermeneutic circle – is considered as a product of necessary conditions of human existence in the world and not as a type of convention. Such hermeneutic structure pertains not only to individual research, but also to the very configuration of scientific communities. This assertion is corroborated in the last part of the dissertation with the discussion of anticipation of meaning in research planning, the function of the scientific tradition, and the use of instruments. After this discussion, the assertion of the hermeneutic structure of scientific research is extended to discussing metascientific attempts at deliberating and modifying scientific activities – with the methodological principle of ‘preregistration’ in psychology and the question of the scientific status of theoretical physics. The analysis yields two conclusions: the anticipation of meaning, as a product of the hermeneutic structure of scientific research, is taken as a methodological hindrance because the knowledge, skills, instruments, and authority of other members can lead to a reduced level of innovation. On the other hand, it is emphasized that the process of anticipation of meaning is necessary and that the attempts to completely neutralize this structure or to consider it completely negative is misguided.