TABLE OF CONTENT
INTRODUCTION
· Meaning of philosophy of History
· Historical background of Georg Wilhelm Friendrich Hegel
· Methods of writing History
MAIN BODY
· Summarization of philosophy of History by Georg Wilhelm Friendrich Hegel
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
Philosophy of history, is the study either of the historical process and its development or of the methods used by historians to understand their material.The term history may be employed in two quite different senses, it may mean the events and actions that together make up the human past, or it may mean the accounts given of that past and the modes of investigation whereby they are arrived at or constructed[1]. When used in the first sense, the word refers to what as a matter of fact happened, while when used in the second sense it refers to the study and description of those happenings.
The notion of philosophical reflection upon history and its nature is consequently open to more than one
interpretation, and modern writers have found it convenient to regard it as
covering two main types of undertaking. On the one hand, they have
distinguished philosophy of history in the traditional or classical
sense; this is conceived to be a first-order enquiry, its subject matter being
the historical process as a whole and its aim being, broadly speaking, one of
providing an overall elucidation or explanation of the course and direction taken by that
process. On the other hand, they have distinguished philosophy of history
considered as a second-order enquiry. Here attention is focused not upon the
actual sequence of events themselves but, instead, upon the procedures and
categories used by practicing historians in approaching and comprehending their
material[2].
The former, often alluded to as speculative philosophy of history, has had a
long and varied career; the latter, which is generally known as critical or
analytical philosophy of history, did not rise to prominence until the 20th
century.
Hegel’s
lectures on the philosophy of history are recognized in German as a popular
introduction to his system; their form is less rigid than generality treatises
and the illustrations, which occupy a large proportion of the work, are trains.
Hegel argue that there are three methods of writing
History and he distinguishing these three methods or modes of doing history as,
Original History,
Firstly,Hegel argue that, Original history consists of an
account of actions, events, and situations lived through and witnessed by the historian. Other primary sources are
used, but as "ingredients only",the
account depends fundamentally on the historian's own witnessing of the times.
Hegel cites Thucydides and Herodotus as examples. He also describes this type
of recorded history as "history whose spirit (the historian) shared
in," and notes that the primary task of "original history" is to
create an internal, "mental representation" of external events.
Original history must deal instead with the "observed and observable
reality" of a people who are self aware and unique.
Further, original history cannot be of great external
scope, it is a limited viewpoint, a portrait of the time. The original
historian does not offer a great deal of theory about or reflection on the events
and situations he or she recounts--"he lives within the spirit of the
times and cannot as yet transcend them." For Hegel, the spirit in which
the original historian is writing is the same as the spirit of the times he or
she is writing about: "the spirit of the author and of the actions he
tells of, are one and the same."[3]
Reflective History, This is the second
historical method Hegel mentions. Reflective history is written after the time
covered in the history has passed, and therefore it involves a remove at which
the historian can analyze and interpret the events he covers. Reflective
history is divided into four sub-methods: universal history, pragmatic,
critical, and specialized.
Universal History, This is the first form of reflective history that Hegel sets out. Universal
history seeks to provide an account of the whole history of a people, or even
of the world. Unlike original history, the spirit in which a universal history
is written is not the spirit of the times written about.[4] Since the extremely broad
scope of universal history necessitates the intense compression of complex
events into simple statements, the primary factor in such histories is the
"thought" of the historian as he works to give a coherent, universal
account.
Pragmatic History, Pragmatic history, the second type of reflective history, involves an
ideology or interpretive method on the part of the historian, who uses
historical events to back up a pointed argument. Hegel disdains pragmatic
histories that seek to provide "moral lessons”
Critical History, This third type of reflective history seeks to re-interpret existing
historical accounts. Critical history is a kind of history of history, which
tests the accuracy of given accounts and perhaps poses alternative accounts.[5] Hegel dislikes this kind
of history, which "extorts" new things to say from existing accounts.
He points out that this is a cheaper way to achieve "reality" in
history, because it puts subjective notions in place of facts and calls these
notions reality.
Specialized History, This final type of reflective history focuses on one thread in history,
such as "the history of art, of law, or of religion." At the same
time, it represents a transitional stage to philosophic history because it
takes a "universal viewpoint." The very focus taken (e.g., the
history of law) represents a choice on the part of the historian to make a
universal concept the guiding rationale for his or her specific history. If the
specialized history is good, the author will give an accurate account of the
fundamental "Idea" (the "inner guiding soul") that guided
the particular events and actions discussed.[6]
Philosophic History, The focus of this third major category of history is the larger process by
which Spirit unfolds in the world as history (this is, of course, Hegel's own
historical method). Philosophic history prioritizes thought before history,
bringing pure philosophical ideas to bear on events. The thoughts that organize
the "raw material" of historical events into philosophic history come
first and can stand alone--they are a priori. Thus, the
philosophic historian studies both the eternal Spirit (which is non-temporal)
and the historical process which is its unfolding (a process which is
temporal).
The
philosophy history as paused by George Frederick Hegel, philosopher and
historian and historian has often been viewed as largely technological. It has
often been speculated that this philosophical presumption arose from the
historical context of Hegel’s life whether negatively from his dedication to
the romantic thesis that reason shapes the universe none the less Hegel’s
commitment to the dialectical progression of time and to the triumphant end of
history is taken to be a largely deterministic and a historical philosophy,
such as a reading, I would argue would be a mistaken.
Hegel’s
task becomes even more difficult by the question of where to search for his
“truth” as philosopher of history, Hegel
concern are primary focused upon the finding basis truths regarding the nature
of reality[7].
Because he seeks metaphysical “first principles of nature his results con not
judged through outside sources or objective facts, but only through individual
reflection and inspiration in contract the philosopher of history is expected
to rely almost wholly upon facts and to avoid the contamination of “bias”
conclusions about the historical meaning follow not from preconceived no twins
but from facts and connection discovered from historical events alone. The
chasm separating these two approaches could hardly be more dramatic.
State
of nature to be in actual experience answers exactly to the idea of a merely
natural conditions freedom as the ideal of that which is original and natural
does not exist as original and nature. Rather must it be first sought out and
won and that by an in callable medical discipline of the intellectual and moral
powers. The state of nature is therefore predominantly that of injustice and
violence, of untamed natural impulses fin human deeds and feelings a
contrivance for calling the members of the state together for taking the votes
and for performing the arithmetical operations of reckoning and comparing the
numbers of the state together for taking the voters and for the different propositions and thereby deeding
upon them the state is an abstraction having even its generic existence in its
simply generic existence but it is an actuality and its simply generic
existence must embody itself in
individual will and activity.[8]
The
legal foundation of the state (the constitution) in a constitution the main
feature of interest is the self-development of the rational that is the
political condition of a people; the setting free of the decisive dements of
the idea so that the several powers in the state manifest themselves as
separate attain their appropriate and special perfection and yet in this
independent condition work together for one object and are held together from organic whole the state is thus the
embodiment of rational freedom, realizing and recognizing itself in an
objective form.
The
state is the idea of spirit in the external manifestation of human will and its
freedom. It is to the state therefore that change in the aspect of history
indissolubly attaches itself and the successive phases of the ideal manifest
themselves the constitutions under which worked historical political principles
the constitutions under which world historical people have reached their
collimation are peculiar to them; and therefore do not present a generally
application political bios were it otherwise the differences of similar
constitutions would consist only in a peculiar method of expanding and
developing that generic basis, where as they really originated in diversity of
principle.[9]
The
mental and moral condition of individuals and their social and religious
conditions (the subjective and objective manifestation of reason) exhibit a
strict correspondence with each other in every grade of progress they that make
them are the like into them” is as true of religious and political ideas as of
religious and political idols where man sets no value on that part of his
mental and moral life which makes him superior to the brutes, brute life will
be an object of worship and bestial sensuality will be the genius of the
ritual.
The
inward or ideal transition, from Egypt to Greece is as just exhibited but Egypt
became a province of the great person kingdom, and the historical transition
takes place where the Persian worked comes in contact with the Greek. Here for the first time an historical transition
meet us, vise in the fall of an empire china and idea as already mentioned have
remain. Persia has not due transition to Greece is indeed, internal but here it
shows itself also externally as a transmission of sovereignty-an occurrence
which from this time forward is ever and an on repeated for the Greeks
surrender the scepter of dominion and of civilization to the Romans, and the
Romans are subdued by the Germans. It we examine this fact of transition more
closely the question suggests itself for example, in this first case of the
kind, verse Persia why it sank, while china and India remain[10].
It
must be observed at the outset, that the phenomenon we investigate-universal
history belong to the phenomenon we investigate universal history belongs to
the realm of spirit the term “world” includes both physical and physical
nature. Physical nature also plays its part in the world’s history and
attention will have to be paid to the fundamental natural relations thus
involved. But spirit and the course of its development, is our substantial
object[11].
Our task does not require us to contemplate nature as a rational system in
itself-through in it’s our proper domain it proves itself such but simply in
its relation to splint. On the stage on which we are observing it universal
history-split displays itself in its most concrete reality. Notwithstanding
this (or rather for the very purpose of comprehending the general principles
which this, its form of concrete reality, embodies) we must premise some abstract
characteristics of the nature of spirit. Such an explanation however cannot be
given here under any other farm than that of bare assertion. The present is not
the occasion for unfolding the ideal of spirit speculatively, for whatever has
a place in an introduction, must as already observed, be taken a simply
historical; something assumed as having been explained and proved elsewhere; or
whose demonstration awaits the sequel of the science of history itself. We have
therefore to mention here. The abstracts characteristics of the nature of
spirit and what means spirit uses in order to realize its ideal.
In
generally George Frederick Hegel as philosopher and historian as often been
viewed as largely ideological he discovered different philosophy in history
during the ancient time where by different society for state or become a state
due to various factors like state of nature to be in actual also researching
about the truth and reality of the nature. Hegel concerns are primary focused
upon the finding basic truth regarding the nature of reality has a
philosopher try to investigate about the
truth and reality of the nature due to the fact that state from spirit in ward
of transition from Egypt to Greece.
REFERENCE
Avineri, Shlomo,
1972, Hegel's Theory of the Modern State, Cambridge: Cambridge.
University
Press.
Beiser, Frederick C.
(ed.), 2008, The Cambridge Companion to Hegel and Nineteenth-
Century Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brandom, Robert B.,
2009, Reason in Philosophy: Animating Ideas, Cambridge, Mass.:
Harvard
University Press.
Bristow, William F.
2007, Hegel and the Transformation of Philosophical Critique,
Oxford:
Oxford
University Press.
Ferrarin, Alfredo,
2001, Hegel and Aristotle, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Forster, Michael N.,
1989, Hegel and Skepticism, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press.
Gadamer, Hans-Georg,
1976, Hegel's Dialectic: Five Hermeneutical Studies, P.
Christopher
Smith (trans.), New Haven: Yale
University Press.
http://www.historicalinsights.com/dave/hegel.html accessed on Sunday at 02:20 pm (2015 )
FREE THINKER,
DAMIAN GABINUS,
dgabinus.blogspot.com,
dgabinus@gmail.com
+255767271987
TANZANIA-MBEYA CITY.
No comments:
Post a Comment