期刊文献+

实验史学:后现代主义在史学领域的诉求 被引量:11

Experimental History: Appeal of Postmodernism in Contemporary Historiography
下载PDF
导出
摘要 效用、真实和时间构成了历史认识结构的基本要素 ,而历史认识史中的结构变迁经历了前现代 (从古代到 1 8世纪末职业化历史学产生之前 )、现代 (职业化历史学时期 ,即 1 8世纪末到 2 0世纪 70年代初 )和后现代 ( 2 0世纪 70年代后 )三个阶段 ,效用、真实、时间依次成为这三个阶段历史认识结构的中心。以时间为结构中心的后现代主义史学表现出历史主义的极端化 ,并进一步强调了时间、变化对于历史真实和历史意义的决定性作用 ,有鉴于此 ,历史叙述和阅读的私人化将促使历史学成为一种实验史学 ,即它不再是那种宣告历史真实的史学 ,而致力于在历史性情境下提供个体史学家认可的文本 ,并交由读者阅读、判断 ,随后通过该文本产生的效用来确认其是否真实。这样 ,任何一种史学实践都将是历史学家当下进行的一项追求历史真实的实验 ,而实验成功与否 。 The author holds that Use, Truth and Time constitute the basic elements in historical cognition structure, the last of which has undergone three periods of development: pre-modern period (from ancient times to the end of the 18th century before the rise of professional historiography); modern period (professional historiography period, from the end of 18th century to early 1970s) and postmodern period (from 1970s to the present). Each of Use, Truth and Time is the centre of the three successive periods respectively. The postmodern history which uses time as its structure centre displays the extremism of historicism and emphasizes further the decisive effect that Time and Change might have on historical truth and meaning. Because of this, the privatization of historical narrative and reading will help make history an experimental one; that is, history will no longer be the kind that declares Truth. Instead, it will commit itself to providing, under the historical context, historical texts that individual historians approve, and give them to readers to read and judge. Then based on the effects of the texts it would decide whether these texts are true or not. Thus, any historiographical practice will be an experiment being conducted by a historian aiming at finding out historical truth. Whether the experiment would be a success or not will depend wholly on the experimental conditions, those provided by the reading environments.
出处 《北京师范大学学报(社会科学版)》 CSSCI 北大核心 2004年第5期77-84,共8页 Journal of Beijing Normal University(Social Sciences)
关键词 实验史学 后现代主义 历史认识 历史学 Experimental Historiography postmodernism historical cognition historiography
  • 相关文献

参考文献12

  • 1[美]何伟亚 邓常春译.怀柔远人:马嘎尔尼使华的中英礼仪冲突[M].北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002..
  • 2[法]罗兰·巴尔特 李幼蒸译 张文杰.历史的话语[A].李幼蒸译,张文杰.现代西方历史哲学译文集[C].上海:上海译文出版社,1984..
  • 3[美]理查德·汪 陈新译.转向语言学:1960—1975年的历史与理论和《历史与理论》[J].哲学译丛,1999,(4).
  • 4[美]伊格尔斯.二十世纪的历史学,何兆武译[M].沈阳:辽宁教育出版社,2003..
  • 5[法]利奥塔 岛子译.后现代状况:关于知识的报告[M].长沙:湖南美术出版社,1996..
  • 6德里克,金衡山.后现代主义与中国历史[J].中国学术,2001,3(1):1-47. 被引量:8
  • 7弗兰克.安克斯密特,陈新.为历史主观性而辩(下)[J].学术研究,2003(4):75-82. 被引量:11
  • 8[美]伊格尔斯.学术与诗歌之间的历史编纂[A].陈恒译.书写历史[C].上海:上海三联书店,2003..
  • 9Hayden White, 'The Burden of History' , History and Theory, Vol. 5 (1966), pp. 111-134.
  • 10Frank Ankersmit, 'The Origins of Postmodernist Historiography', in Historiography Between Modernism and Postmodernism, edited by Jerzy Topolski, Amsterdam,1994, pp. 87-117.

二级参考文献14

  • 1F. R. Ankersmit, Aesthetic politics : political philosophy beyond fact and value,Stanford 1997.
  • 2导论《反对道德规范》.
  • 3The issue is intensively discussed in S. Friedlander ed. , Probing the limits of representation, Cambridge (Ma) 1992.
  • 4See also S. G. Crowell, "Mixed messages: the heterogeneity of historical discourse", History and Theory 37 (1998).
  • 5K. R. Popper, The logic of scientific discovery, London 1972; 41.
  • 6F. R. Ankersmit, Narrative logic, The Hague 1983; 239 ff.
  • 7M. Howard, "Lords of destruction," Times Literary Supplement, 12 november 1981,1323.
  • 8See N. Machiavelli, Discourses on Livy. Translated by Harvey C. Mansfield and Nathan Tarcov, Chicago 1996, 60.
  • 9F. Wagner, Geschichtswissenschaft, Mtinchen 1951 ; 34.
  • 10W. H. Walsh, An introduction to philosophy of history, London 1967, 93-117.

共引文献23

同被引文献181

引证文献11

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部