期刊文献+

论以史为鉴有效性的限度 被引量:3

On the Limitation of Validity of “Taking History as a Mirror”
原文传递
导出
摘要 “以史为鉴”是中国最古老的文化观念之一,其有效性被国人视为理所当然,但受到近代以来的西方思想界的怀疑乃至否定,如黑格尔认为,经验和历史告诉我们,各民族和各政府从未向历史学习。“以史为鉴”的有效性在本质上是或然的,而不是必然的。其有效性乃基于人类的理性与永恒的人性:理性使人具有学习历史经验教训的能力,永恒不变的人性在客观上可以成为理性认识的对象。但人类借鉴历史经验教训时,不单单受理性的支配,更受到与生俱来的欲望(物欲、情欲与权欲)的强力干预,故人们对于“以史为鉴”选择不是必然的。人类历史上发生的不胜枚举的悲剧在形式上千差万别,但在本质上却大多归于欲望泛滥。锁住权力导致的欲望泛滥是近代政治的核心问题之一。 As one of the oldest notions in traditional Chinese culture, the validity of “taking history as a mirror”has been taken for granted and emphatically valued by Chinese people, but it has been suspected and evendenied by Western intellectual circles since the modern times. Hegel said, for example, what experienceand history teach is that all nations and governments have never learned from history. The effectiveness of “learning from history” is essentially problematic rather than inevitable. Its validity is based on humanrationality which enables people to learn historical experience and lessons, and eternal human nature whichcan be treated as the object of rational cognition. However, human beings, in drawing lessons from history,are not solely directed by their rationality, but also strongly interfered by their innate desires( such asemotion for material comforts, passion for sex, pursuit for power), it is not inevitable to choose to acceptlessons from history. Tragedies in the history of human beings vary in form, but are identical andhomologous in essence, which is mostly due to the desires that expand proportionally with power. It is one ofthe essential issues to contain power within an institutional cage in modern politics.
作者 张绪山 Zhang Xushan
出处 《清华大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》 CSSCI 北大核心 2022年第3期28-43,215,216,共18页 Journal of Tsinghua University(Philosophy and Social Sciences)
  • 相关文献

引证文献3

二级引证文献10

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