Modern Philosophy of History

Author(s):  
Michael Murray
Author(s):  
Sp. Sh. Aytov

This article is devoted to the analysis of the formation of the cognitive perspective of the historical-anthropological dimension of modern philosophy of history. The influence of the mentioned problem field on the development of intellectual directions of modern philosophical and historical studios was studied.


2017 ◽  
pp. 29
Author(s):  
Héctor Samour

ResumenEn este artículo reflexiono sobre las posibilidades de pensar una filosofía crítica de la historia en la actualidad. Me refiero a una filosofía crítica en el sentido de una filosofía sustantiva de la historia que proponga una serie de aspectos teóricos y normativos que permitan esclarecer alternativas emancipadoras de acción en el contexto latinoamericano.2 Comenzaré con un análisis de lo que se ha dado en llamar la crisis de la filosofía clásica (o moderna) de la historia, que dio forma a un tipo de reflexión sobre la historia orientada a construir una interpretación sistemática de la Historia Universal, de acuerdo con un principio según el cual los acontecimientos históricos se unifican en su sucesión y se dirigen hacia un significado fun- damental.3 En un segundo momento, haré un repaso de las principales críticas contemporáneas a esa filosofía de la historia, valorando sus aciertos y sus deficiencias, para determinar qué sigue siendo válido o no de las distintas propuestas de las filosofías modernas o ilustradas de la historia, y asentar así la necesidad de una renovada filosofía de la historia, que no se reduzca a puros aspectos metodológicos, sino que tematice crítica y sustantivamente el proceso histórico real, pero con supuestos metafísicos y epistemológicos distintos a los del proyecto moderno.Palabras clave: modernidad - historia - filosofía de la historia - crisis de la filosofía de la historia - liberación históricaAbstractIn this article, I reflect on the possibilities of thinking a philosophy that criticizes history today. I am referring to a criticizing philosophy in the sense of a substantive philosophy of history that proposes a series of theoretical and normative aspects allowing to clarify emancipating al- ternatives for action in the Latin American context. I will begin with an analysis of what has come to be called the crisis of classical (or modern) philosophy of history, which formed a kind of reflection on history aimed at constructing a systematic interpretation of Universal History, according to a principle in which historical events are unified in their succession and are directed towards a fundamental meaning. After that, I will review the main contemporary criticisms of this philosophy of history, assessing its accuracies and deficiencies in order to determine what is still valid or invalid in the various proposals of modern or enlightened philosophies of history, and to settle the need for a renewed philosophy of history, not to be reduced to pure methodological aspects, but to discuss the critical and substantive real historical process, with metaphysical and epistemological assumptions different from those of the modern project.Keywords: Modernity - history - philosophy of history - crisis of the philosophy of history - historical liberationResumoNeste artigo, posso refletir sobre as possibilidades de pensar uma filosofia crítica da história hoje. Quero dizer uma filosofia crítica no sentido de uma filosofia substantiva da história que proponha uma série de aspectos teóricos e normativos que permitam esclarecer alternativas emancipatórias de ação no contexto latino-americano. Vou começar com uma análise do que tem sido chamado a crise da filosofia clássica (ou moderna) da história, que deu forma a um tipo de reflexão sobre a história orientada a construir uma interpretação sistemática da História Universal, de acordo com um princípio que segundo os eventos históricos unificam-se em sua sucessão e se dirigem a um significado fundamental. Num segundo momento, farei uma revisão das principais críticas contemporâneas para aquela filosofia da história, valorando os seus sucessos e deficiências, para determinar o que continua sendo válido ou não das diversas pro- postas das filosofias modernas ou ilustradas da história e assim assentar a necessidade de uma renovada filosofia da história, que não se reduz somente a aspectos metodológicos, mas que gera uma temática crítica e substantivamente do processo histórico real, porém com suposições metafísicas e epistemológicas diferentes daqueles do projeto moderno.Palavras-chave: modernidade - história - filosofia da história - crise da filosofia da história - libertação histórica


2021 ◽  
pp. 154-173
Author(s):  
Juan Manuel Torbidoni

This paper analyses the concept of “nowtime” (Jetztzeit) in Walter Benjamin’s “On the concept of history.” It shows its centrality in Benjamin’s philosophy of history, by defining it in opposition to two elements of Kantian philosophy: on the one hand, “empty, homogeneous time,” on the other, the faith in the infinite, inevitable progress of a generic “mankind.” It argues that the notions of now-time and truth as flitting hark back to Benjamin’s early concern about the devaluation of experience in modern philosophy and the need to rescue the ephemeral as a decisive element in metaphysics. Rather than a historical category, now-time denotes an instance of redemption


2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-210
Author(s):  
Peter Vogt

This paper looks at modern philosophy of history in the sense of the German concept of “Geschichtsphilosophie”. “Geschichtsphilosophie”, as it was formulated since the heydays of German Idealism, always implied the belief that it is possible to make true statements about the future. I will take a closer look at such a version of philosophy of history by reconstructing Odo Marquard’s arguments against “Geschichtsphilosophie” and Heinz Dieter Kittsteiner’s defense of it. These two authors were asking precisely the same question about the essence of “Geschichtsphilosophie”, but came to totally different conclusions. I will defend Marquard’s position and thus will come to the position that history cannot be made or at least cannot be made in the way agents want it to be made. However, my insistence on the inevitable limits of any project to make history as it has been constitutive for modern philosophy of history, in no way precludes the possibility of making politics. Thus, at the very end of my paper, I argue for the fundamental difference between the making of history and the making of politics.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3A) ◽  
pp. 528-537
Author(s):  
Yuliya Dobrolyubska ◽  
Olena Paradiuk

The purpose of our research is to determine the main trends in the development of historical consciousness in a crisis society and environment. Our hypothesis is an attempt to systematically analyze modern historiosophical and philosophical-historical concepts, schools, approaches, doctrines that express the essence of transformational processes within the relationship of tradition and innovation - in the development of society and everyday life. In our opinion, modern philosophical-historical and historiosophical views are also in a state of uncertainty, which greatly complicates the solution of our research goal. But, our approach in the sense of the above understanding of the defining trend of socio-social development, can be proposed as a generalization of the content of history - to achieve maximum freedom of society and man, taking into account all the concerns that are key, as in the anthropological segment of society and in terms of the relationship between society and nature.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document