Buku
The nature of historical explanation
HE expression 'the philosophy of history' has come T to have various associations. By some it may be regarded as signifying a submarine monster, dredged from the deep waters of nineteenth-century metaphysics, its jaws occasionally opening to emit prophecies in a dead (or at any rate a foreign) tongue the language of Hegelian dialectic. By some it is thought to be a mysterious subject, not quite philosophy, and yet again, not quite history, but a kind of vaguely disreputable amalgam of both. Alternatively, it may be held that books on the philosophy of history are in a sense manuals for doing history, rather as a manual on fly-fishing might, at a stretch, be termed 'the theory of fly-fishing'. And the latter supposition is encouraged by the ambiguity of the word 'history'; for when we use the word we may, on the one hand, be taken to be referring to the past events, activities, thoughts, and so forth about which historians write-when, for example, we say that Jones's researches are leading to the discovery of much of the history of the last few years, or when we remark that history repeats itself: on the other hand, we
No other version available