The Triple Interpretation of German Historicism and Its Theoretical Contribution to Historical Materialism
Wu Xuping1,2, Zhang Dandan1
1.School of Marxism, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China 2.Research Center for;Marxism Theory Innovation and Communication, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
Abstract：To gain a profound understanding and interpretation of the essential character of historical materialism, we need to elucidate the original relationship between historical materialism and German historicism in the intellectual history. There is a triple interpretation of German historicism: scientific historicism, historical relativism, and vitalism.Scientific historicism proves the scientific status of history through methods and procedural principles such as objectivity, systematicity, and typification in historical research. It upholds the autonomy and uniqueness of history, rejecting the notion that the real world is the result of transcendental deduction of reason. It examines historical facts from an empirical nominalist standpoint, thereby grasping the coherence of historical processes. Ranke, in his scrupulous and objective approach, examined the available sources of history. He adhered to the principle of reconstructing the past but fell into the trap of excessive pursuit of reductivism and superficial objectivity. Droysen focused on the understanding and interpretation of the meaning of history itself, but his Hegelian paradigm of historical explanation made historical knowledge dependent on inevitability logic. Burckhardt executed a major shift to emphasis on individuality, the meaning of a specific historical culture, and the spirit of freedom, which showed his individualistic and conservative tendencies in terms of historical progress. Therefore, scientific historicism has fallen into an inherent tension between the pursuit of objectivity and the recognition of theological beliefs.Unlike scientific historicism which uses the principle of objectivity to construct systematic and scientific history, historical relativism advocates a universal validity of principle to study human nature, the value and meaning of history, leading to justify the scientific status of history. However, historicism cannot detach itself from the uniqueness and finitude of historical culture, thus arriving at a different direction of relativism of nature and culture on the basis of romanticism. On the one hand, While Herder advocated for the universality of naturalistic principles, this proposition proves ineffective when divorced from its historical context. On the other hand, the endeavor of historicism to study the standards of universal value for the possibility of historical knowledge faces the limitations of history. Schiller, Dilthey, and Neo-Kantians faced this dilemma. Schiller was concerned with human history rather than nature. Dilthey tried to understand how the universal ideas of history came to be within individuals. Windelband and Rickert explained the conditions for universal validity, which are inseparable from cultural particularities and subjectivism. Simmel explicitly defended the relativity of history. These instances collectively indicate the inclination of historicism towards relativism.Vitalism approaches history by incorporating irrational factors such as life, will, intuition, and time. It cares about humanity itself and the meaning of life, and puts history on organic life. In this traditional direction of historicism, figures like Schopenhauer and Nietzsche endeavored to understand life through the lens of will and introspection. The philosophy of life, said Dilthey, comprehends the historical process, according to the unity of fundamental category of human life experience. Bergson relied on intuition to grasp historical change. In conclusion, vitalism turns its attention to a new direction of exploring the possibility of historical knowledge through the will and intuition, and excludes objectivity and sociality from the perspective of history, so it is difficult to prove the legitimacy of history as a science.Therefore, Marx’s historical materialism and German historicism present a genetic adherence relationship. First, German historicists’ unwavering focus on historical facts and consciousness exerted a profound impact on historical materialism. Second, German historicism and historical materialism share a common thesis on explaining the nature of history and reality. Third, German historicism, entangled in the realm of pure thought, becomes a critical target for Marx to explain history materialistically. Historical materialism bears the entire mission of the development of German historicism and is an objective result of the development of German historicism, which also justifies the essential character of “historical science”.
吴旭平, 张丹丹. 德国历史主义的三重演绎及其对历史唯物主义的理论贡献[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2024, 54(3): 13-25.
Wu Xuping, Zhang Dandan. The Triple Interpretation of German Historicism and Its Theoretical Contribution to Historical Materialism. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2024, 54(3): 13-25.
1 Koslowski P. （ed.）， The Discovery of Historicity in German Idealism and Historism， Berlin： Springer， 2005. 2 Iggers G. G.， “Historicism： the history and meaning of the term，” Journal of the History of Ideas， Vol. 56， No. 1 （1995）， pp. 129-152. 3 德］兰克： 《论十九世纪》，见何兆武主编： 《历史理论与史学理论——近现代西方史学著作选》，刘鑫、李春平、何冰等编译，北京：商务印书馆，1999年，第225-229页。 4 von Ranke L.， The Theory and Practice of History， edited with an introduction by Iggers G. G.， London： Routledge， 2011. 5 德］德罗伊森： 《历史知识理论》，胡昌智译，北京：北京大学出版社，2006年。 6 Maclean M. J.， “Johann Gustav Droysen and the development of historical hermeneutics，” History and Theory， Vol. 21， No. 3 （1982）， pp. 347-365. 7 德］卡尔·洛维特： 《世界历史与救赎历史：历史哲学的神学前提》，李秋零、田薇译，上海：上海人民出版社，2005年。 8 瑞士］雅各布·布克哈特： 《世界历史沉思录》，金寿福译，北京：北京大学出版社，2007年。 9 Martin J. R.， “The theory of storms： Jacob Burckhardt and the concept of ‘historical crisis’，” Journal of European Studies， Vol. 40， No. 4 （2010）， pp. 307-327. 10 Beiser F. C.， The German Historicist Tradition， New York： Oxford University Press， 2011. 11 德］席勒： 《人的美学教育书简》，见张玉书选编： 《席勒文集》第6卷，张佳珏、张玉书、孙凤城译，北京：人民文学出版社，2005年。 12 Grossmann W.， “Schiller’s philosophy of history in his Jena lectures of 1789-90，” PMLA， Vol. 69， No. 1 （1954）， pp. 156-172. 13 Kluback W.， Wilhelm Dilthey’s Philosophy of History， New York： Columbia University Press， 1956. 14 德］威廉·狄尔泰： 《历史理性批判手稿》，陈锋译，上海：上海译文出版社，2012年。 15 Bambach C. R.， Heidegger， Dilthey， and the Crisis of Historicism， Ithaca： Cornell University Press， 1995. 16 Windelband W.， “Rectorial address， Strasbourg， 1894，” History and Theory， Vol. 19， No. 2 （1980）， pp. 169-185. 17 英］罗伯特·M.伯恩斯、休·雷蒙-皮卡德： 《历史哲学：从启蒙到后现代性》，张羽佳译，北京：北京师范大学出版社，2008年。 18 德］亨利希·李凯尔特编： 《李凯尔特的历史哲学》，涂纪亮译，北京：北京大学出版社，2007年。 19 Schwartz B.， “How is history possible？ Georg Simmel on empathy and realism，” Journal of Classical Sociology， Vol. 17， No. 3 （2017）， pp. 213-237. 20 德］西美尔： 《历史哲学问题——认识论随笔》，陈志夏译，上海：上海译文出版社，2006年。 21 德］叔本华： 《作为意志和表象的世界》，石冲白译，北京：商务印书馆，2018年。 22 Schopenhauer A.， The World as Will and Representation， vol. 1， Cambridge： Cambridge University Press， 2010. 23 德］尼采： 《不合时宜的沉思》，李秋零译，上海：华东师范大学出版社，2007年。 24 Berkowitz P.， “Nietzsche’s ethics of history，” The Review of Politics， Vol. 56， No. 1 （1994）， pp. 5-27. 25 德］威廉·狄尔泰： 《精神科学中历史世界的建构》，安延明译，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2010年。 26 Palmer R. E.， Hermeneutics： Interpretation Theory in Schleiermacher， Dilthey， Heidegger， and Gadamer， Evanston： Northwestern University Press， 1969. 27 德］马克思： 《〈政治经济学批判〉序言》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译： 《马克思恩格斯文集》第2卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年，第588-594页。 28 德］恩格斯： 《英国状况——评托马斯·卡莱尔的〈过去和现在〉1843年伦敦版》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译： 《马克思恩格斯全集》第3卷，北京：人民出版社，2002年，第495-525页。 29 德］马克思： 《1844年经济学哲学手稿》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译： 《马克思恩格斯文集》第1卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年。 30 德］马克思、恩格斯： 《德意志意识形态》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译： 《马克思恩格斯文集》第1卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年。 31 英］莱蒙： 《历史哲学：思辨、分析及其当代走向》，毕芙蓉译，北京：北京师范大学出版社，2009年。 32 德］恩格斯： 《致约瑟夫·布洛赫》，见中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局编译： 《马克思恩格斯文集》第10卷，北京：人民出版社，2009年，第591-594页。 33 匈］卢卡奇： 《历史与阶级意识——关于马克思主义辩证法的研究》，杜章智、任立、燕宏远译，北京：商务印书馆，1999年。 34 德］海德格尔： 《存在与时间》，陈嘉映、王庆节译，北京：商务印书馆，2016年。
2024, Vol. 54 
