アイテムタイプ |
Article |
ID |
|
プレビュー |
画像 |
|
キャプション |
|
|
本文 |
AN00100104-19590700-0034.pdf
Type |
:application/pdf |
Download
|
Size |
:956.6 KB
|
Last updated |
:Dec 2, 2011 |
Downloads |
: 617 |
Total downloads since Dec 2, 2011 : 617
|
|
本文公開日 |
|
タイトル |
タイトル |
歴史事象の一回限り性について
|
カナ |
レキシ ジショウ ノ イッカイ カギリ セイ ニ ツイテ
|
ローマ字 |
Rekishi jisho no ikkai kagiri sei ni tsuite
|
|
別タイトル |
名前 |
On the uniqueness of historical events
|
カナ |
|
ローマ字 |
|
|
著者 |
名前 |
神山, 四郎
|
カナ |
コウヤマ, シロウ
|
ローマ字 |
Koyama, Shiro
|
所属 |
慶應義塾大學文學部
|
所属(翻訳) |
Keio gijuku University
|
役割 |
|
外部リンク |
|
|
版 |
|
出版地 |
|
出版者 |
名前 |
三田史学会
|
カナ |
ミタ シガクカイ
|
ローマ字 |
Mita shigakukai
|
|
日付 |
出版年(from:yyyy) |
1959
|
出版年(to:yyyy) |
|
作成日(yyyy-mm-dd) |
|
更新日(yyyy-mm-dd) |
|
記録日(yyyy-mm-dd) |
|
|
形態 |
|
上位タイトル |
名前 |
史学
|
翻訳 |
|
巻 |
32
|
号 |
2
|
年 |
1959
|
月 |
7
|
開始ページ |
34(162)
|
終了ページ |
53(181)
|
|
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
DOI |
|
URI |
|
JaLCDOI |
|
NII論文ID |
|
医中誌ID |
|
その他ID |
|
博士論文情報 |
学位授与番号 |
|
学位授与年月日 |
|
学位名 |
|
学位授与機関 |
|
|
抄録 |
There is a classical statement: while natural science has as its objects things that repeat themselves, historical science deals with unique events. This is why the former is said to be a nomothetic science and the latter idiographic science. But such a scheme of division seems to me too rigorous and too formalist. To be sure a historical survey of the philosophy of history in Europe reveals some such metaphysical premise peculiar to Christianity, but this premise is of such a nature that we cannot reasonably prove it. The idealistic philosophers of history have tried to draw out the absolute nature of history from it, and consequently fallen into an exaggerated sort of spiritualism and intuitionism. Is there no way to grasp the uniqueness of history but by telepathy ? Our answer to this question runs as follows : 1. The "uniqueness" of history is not a simple quality which each historical event possesses, but the uniqueness of interest or standpoint which characterizes each historian. 2. So it is something relative. 3. Moreover the historian makes use of universallaws and general terms in his unique individual descriptions. 4. The historical events themselves do not in any way exclude the possibility of being generalized, of being, that is, viewed as repeating themselves. On the other hand, historical science should not be regarded in the same light as natural and social sciences, nor is it a mere application of the latter. Explanation in historical science does not stand on the same level as explanation in science. In contrast to the latter which always explains in terms of instance and generalization, the former does so in terms of theme and illustration. Thus in this paper we seek to find the true nature of historical explanation between idealism and scientism.
|
|
目次 |
一 歴史の一回性の形而上學的前提
二 歴史のsui generisの主張
三 歴史事象の一回性の根據
四 歴史的説明と理論的説明
五 歴史の科學的説明の可能性
|
|
キーワード |
|
NDC |
|
注記 |
|
言語 |
|
資源タイプ |
|
ジャンル |
|
著者版フラグ |
|
関連DOI |
|
アクセス条件 |
|
最終更新日 |
|
作成日 |
|
所有者 |
|
更新履歴 |
|
インデックス |
|
関連アイテム |
|