【作者】 杨金华；

【导师】 张曙光；

【作者基本信息】 华中科技大学 ， 马克思主义哲学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 研究历史不仅要确定某些历史事实,还需要从历史事实中演绎出历史意义,或者对历史事实赋予其意义。也就是说,还需要对历史事实进行理解。那么,我们是怎样进行历史理解的呢?在传统历史研究中,人们都坚守这样一个信念,认为历史的活动者在历史中无疑寄托有他的“原意”(meaning),即他想让历史说什么,表达什么。现代的人们对历史的理解,就是以中立者的身份排除各种误解造成的偏见,去完全重建历史活动者原有的意义世界。实际上,在历史理解的过程中,理解的主动权不是由理解者所决定,而是由处于不同境遇之中的理解者和历史对象的互相作用所决定。也就是说,理解者视域和历史对象的视域经“视域融合”后形成历史理解。这个“视域融合”超出了现在的界限而上溯到过去,也超出了过去的界限而延伸到现在。任何历史理解都要受到两个基本方面的制约,既受到理解主体的制约,也受到历史对象的制约。理解主体规定了理解的视域,规定了对历史对象的理解程度;而历史对象则规定了理解主体的基本目标,规定了理解的客观内容。换言之,历史对象不是已死的过去或史料,不是客体而是另一个“我”,历史对象也具有和理解者一样的主体的地位。历史理解是一种对话交流的本体存在,历史的意义在主体间的对话交流中作为对立中介的生成物得以呈现。所以说,在这种相互交流凸现了历史理解的主体间性意蕴。每个人在与传统的接触中,都会自觉不自觉地形成不同的历史文化联系,而每个人的生活经验不尽相同,又给形成这种历史联系的方式,烙上了个人独有的性格。而每个人都以自己的独特经验和对过去的个性理解,占有着一个他人无法取代或完全重合的个体视域。理解的过程要依赖他自己的视域及其开放的能力,最大程度地容纳他所能感知到的解释对象的世界。所以,理解主体具有特定的历史环境、历史条件和历史地位,历史理解的结果就具有很大的境遇性、条件性和相对性。那么,具有不同历史境遇的理解主体面对同一历史事实怎样才能达到理解的一致性呢?传统的解决方案,无论实证主义、历史主义还是哲学解释学,都是希望通过实证方法、心理重构或者理解前见的区分达到理解的普遍有效性。其实这些方法本质上都是主体主义的视角。换言之,他们都是从个体的视域出发去理解历史没有考虑到其他理解主体的存在,希望不同主体之间普遍的人性保证个体的理解对其他主体具有同样的有效性。但是,共同人性和客观精神的假设只是一种形而上学的预设。仅从个体视角无法保证自己的理解具有对其他主体的有效性,单一主体的理解必然要走向多元主体,走向主体间性的历史理解。作为一种社会性存在物,任何一个理解主体都不可能孤独地生存着。也就是说,任何一个理解主体的存在必定包含着其他主体与他一样的存在。所以,真正的历史理解活动只有在主体之间的社会交往关系中,在主体与主体相互承认和尊重对方的主体身份时才可能存在。每个个体首先以自我为主体,同时又必须在一定程度上把对方也作为主体而不是看作异己的“客体”,在社会交往的基础上完成主体间的互动。换言之,个体的理解视域内在地拥有主体间的维度。在历史理解过程中,自我主体要同时受到主体自身的认知结构和共同理解主体这两个尺度的客观制约。诸多理解主体在理解过程中,发现了他人并体悟到了自我,从而不再将自己局限于以自我为中心的狭小范围之内,而是跳出自我,融入自我与他人共同构筑的广泛的理解领域中。所以,历史理解主体在理解过程中便时刻能够从对方的角度去理解,通过把自己看问题的角度与立场呈现给对方,获得主体间的相互理解和沟通。要达到历史理解的普遍有效性,理解主体之间必须学会承认、接受并且欣赏差异,要调和矛盾,解决冲突。在理解历史的过程中,任何理解主体都不能目中无人,妄自尊大,而必须同时肯定、尊重他人的主体地位,肯定“他人”具有的相应权利、地位和尊严。诸多理解主体只有在多方沟通、相互交流的基础上,才能实现不同理解视域的相互补充和不同视域的相互融合。在经历了不同的视域后,在一个更大的视域中重新把握历史对象,即所谓更大范围的主体间的“视域融合”,从而达到主体间的“共识”。也就是说,单个主体对历史的理解是通过交互主体化来实现普遍有效性,这一社会化过程正是个体的理解转化为主体之间一致性的过程。所以说,正是基于交往实践基础上的主体间性维度,才保证了人们理解过程具有收敛性与限制性,从而保证理解结果的有序性、规范性、一致性。更多还原

【Abstract】 The history sduty not only wants certain some historical facts, but also needs to deduce the historical significances from the historical events, or give the significances to the historical facts. Also is to say, we still need to carry on the understanding to the historical facts. So, how have we carried on the historical understanding? In traditional historical research, the people all guard securely a conviction that the actor of the historical consigns to have“original intention"(meaning) in the historical events doubtlessly. Then it wants to let historical events say what, expression what. The modern people’s understanding to the history with the neutral attitude expels the prejudice of various misunderstanding to result in, go to reconstruct original meaning world of the historical activity completely.Actually, in the process of historical understanding, the active power that understanding is not decided by understanding, but is from the interplay with the understanding be placed in the different circumstances and the historical objects.Also ,the historical understanding become through" the horizon fusing" by the horizon of understander and the horizon of historical objects. The" horizon fusing" outruns the boundary and the tops of now to arrive in the past, also outran the past boundary but extend till now. Any historical understanding to be subjected by two basic aspects, that is to say, is subjected to the aspect understanding and supervision of the historical facts. The visual field that understanding rules to actor of understandin, ruled to the degree of the historical understanding.But the historical objects then rules to the basic target of understanding and objective contents of understanding. So, the historical understanding is not to try hard to attain to rebuild" the history original intention" objectively, but is the horizon fusing and output" the result history", also is to say that the historical significance is the understanding medium borning" the third party".Everybody will become the different historical culture contact with the different historical culture traditionally.And everybody’s life experience does not fulfils same alike, again become the ways of this kind of historical contact on the personality for possess singly. But everybody has understood the past character with own special experience, occupied an individuality that others can’t replace or match completely. The process of understanding wants to depend on the horizon and the ability that it open owns, the biggest degree ground accept him the horizon of hermeneutic object. So, the historical understanding has the particular historical environment, the historical condition and the historical positions, the results that historical understanding has the situatal condition and opposites.So, will the understanding that has the different historical situation facing the same historical facts attain the consistency of the understanding? Traditional solution, regardless the substantial doctrine, the historism still the hermeneutic, all hope to pass the substantial evidence method, re-perform in mental or distinct prujudice of understanding, attained universally validity of the understanding. In fact, these methods are all the angle of view of the individualism essentially. In other words, they are all from the individual to see the history, have no in consideration of the existence without other understanding. And hope the universally human nature to assurance individual of different to the same validity. But, the assumption of the common human nature and objective spirit is just prepare of a kind of metaphysics to establish, Only can’t guarantee that own understanding from the individual angle of view have the validity of others. The understanding of the individual should to head for the diversal subjects by all means, namely the intersubjectivitical historical understanding.Be a kind of social existence thing, whichever understanding all impossibly exists and stands alonely. Also is to say, the existence of the whichever understanding includes others necessarily with his similar existence. So, the real understanding activity only has in social association relation between others, at the admitting and respect of the other party mutually just may exist. Each individual take ego as the first must make the other party be the subjects to some extent again at the same time. Also, that is not" an individual" as the dissident, but the subject of interaction at foundation of social association completely .In other words, the horizon individual understanding owns the intersubjectiviticial dimension insidely. In historical understanding process, the ego understanding wants to be cognitied by the own oneself and common understand objective supervision of these two dimensions at the same time. Many understanding discovered the others and the ego-self in understand process. Thus no longer limit to the ego for the center of the narrow and small scope inside, but jump to come into the extensive understanding realm those others together. So, the historical understanding in the process can understand from the angle of the other party then and every moment, present the angle and position of views to the other party, then acquiring understanding and communication mutually.To attain universally validity of the historical understanding, we should to master the acknowledgement and accept and enjoy the difference understanding, being harmony with antinomy, solving the conflict. In the process of historical understanding, any understanding can’t any others in eyes, but must affirm the position of the respect others at the same time, affirm"the others" to have correspond the right, position and dignities. Many understanding only at foundation communicate mutually in many ways, and then can carry out the dissimilarity understanding to see the horizon with dissimilarity mutually.After experiencing the horizon differently, we can see largely to re- hold the historical object in the horizon, namely ,so-called the larger scope of" the horizon fusing", thus attain" consensus" between corpuses. Also is to say, the historical understanding have to pass to hand over with each other turns to carry out the universally validity, the exactly individual understanding intersubjectical conversion is the process of a consistency. So say, practicing an intersbjectivitical dimension on the foundation the association exactly, just guaranteeing that the people’understanding have the astringency and restricts, thus guaranteeing the result of understanding have the orderly, norm, and consistency.更多还原