哲学史-philosophy of history(英文版)-第3章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


the　plicated　issue　of　their　affairs；　present　quite　another　field。　Rulers；　Statesmen；　Nations；　are
wont　to　be　emphatically　mended　to　the　teaching　which　experience　offers　in　history。　But　what
experience　and　history　teach　is　this；　…　that　peoples　and　governments　never　have　learned　anything
from　history；　or　acted　on　principles　deduced　from　it。　Each　period　is　involved　in　such　peculiar
circumstances；　exhibits　a　condition　of　things　so　strictly　idiosyncratic；　that　its　conduct　must　be
regulated　by　considerations　connected　with　itself；　and　itself　alone。　Amid　the　pressure　of　great
events；　a　general　principle　gives　no　help。　It　is　useless　to　revert　to　similar　circumstances　in　the　Past。
The　pallid　shades　of　memory　struggle　in　vain　with　the　life　and　freedom　of　the　Present。　Looked　at　in
this　light；　nothing　can　be　shallower　than　the　oft…repeated　appeal　to　Greek　and　Roman　examples
during　the　French　Revolution。　Nothing　is　more　diverse　than　the　genius　of　those　nations　and　that　of
our　times。　Johannes　v。　Müller；　in　his　Universal　History　as　also　in　his　History　of　Switzerland；　had
such　moral　aims　in　view。　He　designed　to　prepare　a　body　of　political　doctrines　for　the　instruction　of
princes；　governments　and　peoples　（he　formed　a　special　collection　of　doctrines　and　reflections；　…
frequently　giving　us　in　his　correspondence　the　exact　number　of　apophthegms　which　he　had
piled　in　a　week）；　but　he　cannot　reckon　this　part　of　his　labour　as　among　the　best　that　he
acplished。　It　is　only　a　thorough；　liberal；　prehensive　view　of　historical　relations　（such　e。g。　as
we　find　in　Montesquieu's　Esprit　des　Loix）；　that　can　give　truth　and　interest　to　reflections　of　this
order。　One　Reflective　History　therefore　supersedes　another。　The　materials　are　patent　to　every
writer：　each　is　likely　enough　to　believe　himself　capable　of　arranging　and　manipulating　them；　and　we
may　expect　that　each　will　insist　upon　his　own　spirit　as　that　of　the　age　in　question。　Disgusted　by
such　reflective　histories　readers　have　often　returned　to　a　with　pleasure　to　a　narrative　adopting　no
particular　point　of　view。　These　certainly　have　their　value；　but　for　the　most　part　they　offer　only
material　for　history。　We　Germans　are　not　content　with　such。　The　French；　on　the　other　hand；
display　great　genius　in　reanimating　bygone　times；　and　in　bringing　the　past　to　bear　upon　the　present
conditions　of　things。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　3。　Critical　History

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　9

The　third　form　of　Reflective　History　is　the　Critical。　This　deserves　mention　as　pre…eminently　the
mode　of　treating　history；　now　current　in　Germany。　It　is　not　history　itself　that　is　here　presented。　We
might　more　properly　designate　it　as　a　History　of　History；　a　criticism　of　historical　narratives　and　an
investigation　of　their　truth　and　credibility。　Its　peculiarity　in　point　of　fact　and　of　intention；　consists　in
the　acuteness　with　which　the　writer　extorts　something　from　the　records　which　was　not　in　the
matters　recorded。　The　French　have　given　as　much　that　is　profound　and　judicious　in　this　class　of
position。　But　they　have　not　endeavoured　to　pass　a　merely　critical　procedure　for　substantial
history。　They　have　duly　presented　their　judgments　in　the　form　of　critical　treatises。　Among　us；　the
so…called　“higher　criticism；”　which　reigns　supreme　in　the　domain　of　philology；　has　also　taken
possession　of　our　historical　literature。　This　“higher　criticism”　has　been　the　pretext　for　introducing
all　the　anti…historical　monstrosities　that　a　vain　imagination　could　suggest。　Here　we　have　the　other
method　of　making　the　past　a　living　reality；　putting　subjective　fancies　in　the　place　of　historical　data；
fancies　whose　merit　is　measured　by　their　boldness；　that　is；　the　scantiness　of　the　particulars　on
which　they　are　based；　and　the　peremptoriness　with　which　they　contravene　the　best　established
facts　of　history。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　10

4。　The　last　species　of　Reflective　History　announces　its　fragmentary　character　on　the　very　face　of　it。
It　adopts　an　abstract　position；　yet；　since　it　takes　general　points　of　view　（e。g。　as　the　History　of　Art；
of　Law；　of　Religion）；　it　forms　a　transition　to　the　Philosophical　History　of　the　World。　In　our　time　this
form　of　the　history　of　ideas　has　been　more　developed　and　brought　into　notice。　Such　branches　of
national　life　stand　in　close　relation　to　the　entire　plex　of　a　people's　annals；　and　the　question　of
chief　importance　in　relation　to　our　subject　is；　whether　the　connection　of　the　whole　is　exhibited　in　its
truth　and　reality；　or　referred　to　merely　external　relations。　In　the　latter　case；　these　important
phenomena　（Art。；　Law；　Religion；　&c。）　appear　as　purely　accidental　national　peculiarities。　It　must　be
remarked　that；　when　Reflective　History　has　advanced　to　the　adoption　of　general　points　of　view；　if
the　position　taken　is　a　true　one；　these　are　found　to　constitute　…　not　merely　external　thread；　a
superficial　series　…　but　are　the　inward　guiding　soul　of　the　occurrences　and　actions　that　occupy　a
nation's　annals。　For；　like　the　soul…conductor　Mercury；　the　Idea　is　in　truth；　the　leader　of　peoples
and　of　the　World；　and　Spirit；　the　rational　and　necessitated　will　of　that　conductor；　is　and　has　been
the　director　of　the　events　of　the　World's　History。　To　bee　acquainted　with　Spirit　in　this　its　office
of　guidance；　is　the　object　of　our　present　undertaking。　This　brings　us　to　。。。

Philosophic　History




III。　Philosophic　History

　　　　　　　　i。　Reason　Governs　the　World　…　ii。　The　Destiny　of　Reason　…　iii。　World　History　



　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　11

The　third　kind　of　history；　—　the　Philosophical。　No　explanation　was　needed　of　the　two　previous
classes；　their　nature　was　self…evident。　It　is　otherwise　with　this　last；　which　certainly　seems　to　require
an　exposition　or　justification。　The　most　general　definition　that　can　be　given；　is；　that　the　Philosophy
of　History　means　nothing　but　the　thoughtful　consideration　of　it。　Thought　is；　indeed。；　essential　to
humanity。　It　is　this　that　distinguishes　us　from　the　brutes。　In　sensations　cognition　and　intellection；　in
our　instincts　and　volitions；　as　far　as　they　are　truly　human　Thought　is　an　invariable　element。　To　insist
upon　Thought　in　this　connection　with　history；　may；　however；　appear　unsatisfactory。　In　this　science
it　would　seem　as　if　Thought　must　be　subordinate　to　what　is　given　to　the　realities　of　fact；　that　this　is
its　basis　and　guide：　while　Philosophy　dwells　in　the　region　of　self…produced　ideas；　without　reference
to　actuality。　Approaching　history　thus　prepossessed；　Speculation　might　be　expected　to　treat　it　as　a
mere　passive　material；　and；　so　far　from　leaving　it　in　its　native　truth；　to　force　it　into　conformity　with　a
tyrannous　idea；　and　to　construe　it；　as　the　phrase　is；　“à　priori。”　But　as　it　is　the　business　of　history
simply　to　adopt　into　its　records　what　is　and　has　been；　actual　occurrences　and　transactions；　and
since　it　remains　true　to　its　character　in　proportion　as　it　strictly　adheres　to　its　data；　we　seem　to　have
in　Philosophy；　a　process　diametrically　opposed　to　that　of　the　historiographer。　This　contradiction；
and　the　charge　consequent　brought　against　speculation；　shall　be　explained　and　confuted。　We　do
not；　however；　propose　to　correct　the　innumerable　special　misrepresentations；　trite　or　novel；　that
are　current　respecting　the　aims；　the　interests；　and　the　modes　of　treating　history；　and　its　relation　to
Philosophy。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　12

The　only　Thought　which　Philosophy　brings　with　it　to　the　contemplation　of　History；　is　the　simple
conception　of　Reason；　that　Reason　is　the　Sovereign　of　the　World；　that　the　history　of　the　world
therefore；　presents　us　with　a　rational　process。　This　conviction　and　intuition　is　a　hypothesis　in　the
domain　of　history　as　such。　In　that　of　Philosophy　it　is　no　hypothesis。　It　is　there　proved　by
speculative　cognition；　that　Reason　—　and　this　term　may　here　suffice　us；　without　investigating　the
relation　sustained　by　the　Universe　to　the　Divine　Being；　—　is　Substance；　as　well　as　Infinite　Power；
its　own　Infinite　Material　underlying　all　the　natural　and　spiritual　life　which　it　originates；　as　also　the
Infinite　Form；　—　that　which　sets　this　Material　in　motion。　On　the　one　hand；　Reason　is　the　substance
of　the　Universe；　viz。　that　by　which　and　in　which　all　reality　has　its　being　and　subsistence。　On　the
other　hand；　it　is　the　Infinite　Energy　of　the　Universe；　since　Reason　is　not　so　powerless　as　to　be
incapable　of　producing　anything　but　a　mere　ideal；　a　mere　intention　—　having　its　place　outside
reality；　nobody　knows　where；　something　separate　and　abstract；　in　the　heads　of　certain　human
beings。　It　is　the　infinite　plex　of　things；　their　entire　Essence　and　Truth。　It　is　its　own　material
which　it　mits　to　its　own　Active　Energy　to　work　up；　not　needing；　as　finite　action　does；　the
conditions　of　an　external　material　of　given　means　from　which　it　may　obtain　its　support；　and　the
objects　of　its　activity。　It　supplies　its　own　nourishment　and　is　the　object　of　its　own　operations。
While　it　is　exclusively　its　own　basis　of　existence；　and　absolute　final　aim；　it　is　also　the　energising
power　realising　this　aim；　developing　it　not　only　in　the　phenomena　of　the　Natural；　but　also　of　the
Spiritual　Universe　—　the　History　of　the　World。　That　this　“Idea”　or　“Reason”　is　the　True；　the
Eternal；　the　absolutely　powerful　essence；　that　it　reveals　itself　in　the　World；　and　that　in　that　World
nothing　else　is　revealed　but　this　and　its　honour　and　glory　—　is　the　thesis　which；　as　we　have　said；
has　been　proved　in　Philosophy　and　is　here　regarded　as　demonstrated。　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　§　13

In　those　of　my　hearers　who　are　not　acquainted　with　Philosophy；　I　may　fairly　presume；　at　least；　the
existence　of　a　belief　in　Reason；　a　desire；　a　thirst　for　acquaintance　with　it；　in　entering　upon　this
course　of　Lectures。　It　is　in　fact；　the　wish　for　rational　insight；　not　the　ambition　to　amass　a　mere　heap
of　acquisitions；　that　should　be　presupposed　in　every　case　as　possessing　the　mind　of　the　learner　in
the　study　of　science。　If　the　clear　idea　of　Reason　is　not　already　developed　in　our　minds；　in　beginning
the　study　of　Universal　History；　we　should　at　least　leave　the　firm；　unconquerable　faith　that　Reason
does　exist　there；　and　that　the　World　of　intelligence　and　conscious　volition　is　not　abandoned　to
chance；　but　must　show　itself　in　the　light　of　the　self…cognisant　Idea。　Yet　I　am　not　obliged　to　make
any　such　preliminary　demand　upon　your　faith。　What　I　have　said　thus　provisionally；　and　what　I　shall
have　further　to　say；　is；　even　in　reference　to　our　branch　of　science；　not　to　be　regarded　as
hypothetical；　but　as　a　summary　view　of　the　whole；　the　result　of　the　investigation　we　are　about　to
pursue；　a　result　which　happens　to　be　known　to　me；　because　I　have　traversed　the　entire　field。　It　is
only　an　inference　from　the　history　of　the　World；　that　its　development　has　been　a　rational　process；
that　the　history　in　question　has　constituted　the　rational　necessary　course　of　the　World　Spirit　—　that
Spirit　whose　nature　is　always　one　and　the　same；　but　which　unfolds　this　its　one　nature　in　the
phenomena　of　the　World's　existence。　This　must；　as　before　stated；　present　itself　as　the　ultimate
result　of　History。　But　we　have　to　take　the　latter　as　it　is。　We　must　proceed　historically　—
empirically。　Among　other　precautions　we　must　take　care　not　to　be　misled　by　professed　historians
who　（especially　among　the　Germans；　and　enjoying　a　considerable　authority）；　are　chargeable　with
the　very　procedure　of　which　they　accuse　the　Philosopher　—　introducing　à　priori　inventions　of
their　own　into　the　records　of　the　Past。　It　is；　for　example；　a　widely　current　fiction；　that　there　was　an
original　primeval　people；　taught　immediately　by　God；　endowed　with　perfect　insight　and　wisdom；
possessing　a　thorough　knowledge　of　all　natural　laws　and　spiritual　truth；　that　there　have　been　such
or　such　sacerdotal　peoples；　or；　to　mention　a　more　specific　averment；　that　there　was　a　Roman
Epos；　from　which　the　Roman　historians　derived　the　early　annals　of　their　city；　&c。　Authorities　of
this　kind　we　leave　to　those　talented　historians　by　profession；　among　whom　（in　Germany　at　least）
their　use　is　not　unmon。　—　We　might　then　announce　it　as　the　first　condition　to　be　observed；　that
we　should　faithfully　adopt　all　that　is　historical。　But　in　such　general　expressions　themselves；　as
“faithfully”　and　“adopt；”　lies　the　ambiguity。　Even　the　ordinary；　the　“impartial”　historiographer；
who　believes　and　professes　that　he　maintains　a　simply　receptive　attitude；　surrendering　himself　only
to　the　data　supplied　him　—　is　by　no　means　passive　as　regards　the　exercise　of　his　thinking　powers。
He　brings　his　categories　with　him；　and　sees　the　phenomena　presented　to　his　mental　vision；
exclusively　through　these　media。　And；　especially　in　all　that　pretends　to　the　name　of　science；　it　is
indispensable　that　Reason　should　not　sleep　—　that　reflection　should　be　in　full　play。　To　him　who
looks　upon　the　world　rationally；　the　world　in　its　turn；　presents　a　rational　aspect。　The　relation　is
mutual。　But　the　various　exercises　of　reflection　—　the　different　points　of　view　—　the　modes　of
deciding　the　simple　question　of　the　relative　importance　of　events　（the　first　category　that　occupies
the　attention　of　the　historian）；　do　not　belong　t