论文部分内容阅读
在康德的体系哲学中,想象力始终作为沟通感知与知性的桥梁。本文尝试在此思路的参照下来探究柯林武德历史哲学的内涵。首先,布莱德雷和柯林武德都秉承了康德批判哲学的进路,反对历史知识中的感知主义教条,试图把经验论讨论的历史事实转化为历史学家进行历史推论活动中的历史证据,以此来澄清历史研究活动中的主体性;其次,柯林武德在布莱德雷批判历史学的基础上,尝试把历史想象看作是历史推论本质的进一步研究,想象地构造也就成为了历史学家认知结构中的必要环节;最后,借助于胡塞尔关于内时间意识的现象学分析,我们可以重构柯林武德关于历史思维的先验论证,以此来阐明历史思维的普遍有效性及其必然性。
In Kant’s system philosophy, imagination always serves as a bridge between perception and perception. This article attempts to explore the connotation of Collingwood’s philosophy of history from the perspective of this idea. First of all, Bradley and Collingwood embrace Kant’s philosophy of critical philosophy, oppose the perceptualist dogma in historical knowledge, attempt to translate the historical facts of the empirical discussion into the historical evidence of historians’ historical deduction, In order to clarify the subjectivity in the historical research activities; secondly, on the basis of Bradley’s criticism of history, Collingwood tries to consider the historical imagination as a further study of the essence of historical reasoning, imaginatively constructing it into history Finally, with the help of Husserl’s phenomenological analysis of inner time consciousness, we can reconstruct Colin Todd’s transcendental argument about historical thinking in order to clarify the universal validity of historical thinking and Its inevitability.