Droysen sought to exploit, for practical political effect, a vision of history as an integral, progressive, and fathomable continuum, and hence in his writings subordinated historical individuality to history's discernible teleology. Droysen's methodological opponent, Rankean historicism, was to the right of his centrist politics. Droysen insisted against Ranke that history is not something "out there" that can be dispassionately and scientifically analyzed but is man's ontological ground. He was basically a moderate Young Hegelian: historians can be scholars (...) and yet ally with and further the rational dynamism of history's normative Ideas because those Ideas are their own as progressive human beings. This battle between Ranke and Droysen illustrates that the evolution of German historical hermeneutics at mid-nineteenth century was generated both by a deep conflict within the German historical tradition and by the confrontation of that tradition with positivism. (shrink)

A scholar of Hellenistic and Prussian history, Droysen developed a historical theory that at the time was unprecedented in range and depth, and which remains to the present day a valuable key for understanding history as both an idea and a professional practice. Arthur Alfaix Assis interprets Droysen’s theoretical project as an attempt to redefine the function of historiography within the context of a rising criticism of exemplar theories of history, and focuses on Droysen’s claim that the (...) goal underlying historical writing and reading should be the development of the subjective capacity to think historically. In addition, Assis examines the connections and disconnections between Droysen’s theory of historical thinking, his practice of historical thought, and his political activism. Ultimately, Assis not only shows how Droysen helped reinvent the relationship between historical knowledge and human agency, but also traces some of the contradictions and limitations inherent to that project. (shrink)

Der vorliegende Band versammelt drei Texte: Johann Gustav Reinbecks 'Abhandlung Von dem Gebrauch der Vernunfft Und Welt-Weißheit In der GOttes-Gelahrtheit' (1733) und 'Erörterung Der Philosophischen Meynung von der sogenandten Harmonia Praestabilita (1737) und Johann Friedrich Bertrams dagegen gerichtete 'Beleuchtung Der Neu-getünchten Meynung von der Harmonia Praestabilita' (1737). Stellt die erste der drei Abhandlungen - schon mit ihrem Titel - so etwas wie Reinbecks Programmschrift des auf die Übereinstimmung von Vernunft und Offenbarung bedachten 'Theologischen Wolffianismus' dar, so dokumentieren (...) die zwei anderen die Debatte Reinbecks mit einem nicht unbedeutenden Vertreter des Halleschen Pietismus über ein zentrales Lehrstück des Leibnizischen Philosophie, die Praestabilierte Harmonie, zu der allerdings auch Reinbeck als Theologe eine differenzierte Meinung hat. (Aus dem Vorwort von Stefan Lorenz) This volume brings together three texts: Johann Gustav Reinbeck’s 'Abhandlung von dem Gebrauch der Vernunfft und Welt-Weißheit in der Gottes-Gelahrtheit' (1733) and 'Erörterung Der Philosophischen Meynung von der sogenandten Harmonia Praestabilita' (1737) and Johann Friedrich Bertram’s refutation of these, 'Beleuchtung Der Neu-getünchten Meynung von der Harmonia Praestabilita' (1737). While the first of these works presents – even in ist title – in effect Reinbeck’s programmatic statement of ‘theological Wolffianism’, concerned with the harmonisation of reason and revelation, the other two document Reinbeck’s debates with a not insignificant representative of Halle Pietism about a central teaching of Leibniz’s philosophy, pre-established harmony, which Reinbeck as a theologian had a sophisticated understanding. (From the introduction by Stefan Lorenz). (shrink)

This paper analyses the methodological writings of the nineteenth century historian Johann Gustav Droysen. It explores how Droysen integrates the political and methodological aspects of historiography. The paper shows that Droysen relies on a procedure of “affirmative genealogy” which, in turn, is based on a concept of historical continuity. On Droysen’s account, historical continuity enables “historical understanding”. And the understanding of historical continuities provides the statesman – the “practical historian” – with a solid basis (...) for political decision making. (shrink)

Die hier vorliegende rezeptionsgeschichtliche Studie leistet eine systematische Aufarbeitung der in der 'Historik' Johann Gustav Droysens (1808-1884) zu findenden Aristoteles-Bezüge und reiht sich somit in die Gruppe der Arbeiten zu den geistesgeschichtlichen Grundlagen der Geschichtstheorie Droysens ein. Durch die Verortung Droysens im Kontext der Aristoteles-Renaissance im 19. Jahrhundert trägt sie zugleich zu deren weiteren Erforschung bei.

Herbart’s attempts to apply psychology to society receive scant mention in English-language histories of psychology. In Germany, however, Herbart has long been regarded as the founder of social psychology. The background of his life and work is sketched, and the gradual extension of his individual psychology towards the social is traced. Although he did not build a coherent system, his approach was novel and several of his original ideas anticipated some later social psychology. Herbart had a number of prominent followers, (...) and through them made a powerful impact on 19th-century social thought. (shrink)

In this paper I revisit nineteenth-century debates over historical objectivity and the political functions of historiography. I focus on two central contributors to these debates: Leopold von Ranke and Johann Gustav Droysen. In their takes on objectivity and subjectivity, impartiality and political engagement I reveal diametrically opposed solutions to shared concerns: how can historians reveal history to be meaningful without taking recourse to speculative philosophy? And how can they produce a knowledge that is relevant to the present (...) when the project of “exemplary” history has been abandoned? I put a special focus on the relativist themes in Ranke’s and Droysen’s answers to these questions. Ranke’s demand for impartiality leads him to think of all historical epochs as equally valid, while Droysen’s emphasis on the historian’s subjectivity relativizes historical truth. In order to explain why Ranke and Droysen nevertheless remained unfazed by the problem of historical relativism, I analyze their normative conceptions of the historian’s disciplinary ethos. I show that Ranke and Droysen think of objective impartiality and subjective partiality not only in methodological terms, but also in terms of justice and ethic duty. This normative element secures the professional study of history an ethical-political relevance for the present. (shrink)

Johann Gustav Droysen (1808-1884) fue no sólo uno de los historiadores más importantes de la Alemania de su tiempo, sino también uno de los teóricos de la historia más influyentes en la tradición hermenéutica de las ciencias del espíritu. Discípulo de Hegel y maestro de Dilthey, Droysen elaboró una ¿histórica¿ (Historik) que pretendía exponer ¿las leyes de la investigación y del saber históricos¿. La histórica de Droysen es dos cosas a la vez: una filosofía material (...) de la historia y una metodología hermenéutica de la ciencia histórica. El presente artículo expone estos dos aspectos. (shrink)

At the end of the 19th century, most professional historians – wherever they existed – deemed history to be a form of knowledge ruled by a method that bears no resemblance with those most commonly traceable in the natural sciences. The bulk of the historian’s task was then frequently regarded as being the application of procedures frequently referred to as ‘historical method’. In the context of such an emerging interest on historical methods and methodology, at least three textbooks stand out: (...) Johann Gustav Droysen’s Grundriss der Historik (Outline of the Theory of History), Ernst Bernheim’s Lehrbuch der historischen Methode (Handbook of Historical Method), and Charles Langlois and Charles Seignobos’s Introduction aux études historiques (Introduction to the Study of History). These books were quite influential in Germany, France, and elsewhere, and they very much helped promote a general idea of historical method that would become relatively consensual among historians of many nationalities by the early 20th century. Such a relative agreement on historical method sponsored both the communication and the development of a sense of disciplinary identity among historians trained within different and sometimes conflicting national traditions. It was then partially extended, partially challenged, and surely made more complex when, from the 1920s on, social and economic historians became a good part of the historiographical establishment in many countries. -/- The three books by Droysen, Bernheim, and Langlois and Seignobos were already pieced together by Rolf Torstendahl, who studied them as a group of texts that, despite their differences, contributed to shape the developments outlined above. However, Torstendahl’s primary aim was to show how Droysen, Bernheim, and Seignobos all resorted to ‘method’ as a way to circumvent skepticism against the possibility of historical knowledge, rather than investigate the internal interrelationships between the three texts. In this chapter I follow precisely this latter, not yet taken, road, focusing on crucial cross-references between the Grundriss, the Lehrbuch, and the Introduction. I intend to show that, at a general level, the schemes of historical method found in these texts are largely convergent, and that this convergence is due to Bernheim’s reading of Droysen and to Langlois and Seignobos’s reading of Bernheim. I will attempt to do it through a regressive approach that starts with an analysis of the Introduction. Aspects of the editorial history and circulation of the three texts will also be briefly addressed, as a way to illustrate their special importance within the framework of early 20th century historical theory. Because my argument calls for a focus on the most general lines of Droysen’s, Bernheim’s, and Langlois and Seignobos’s schemes of historical method, I will, for the sake of consistency, refrain from analysing in-depth the complex epistemological and ontological arguments in which those schemes are nested. (shrink)

Johann Gustav Droysen fue no sólo uno de los historiadores más importantes de la Alemania de su tiempo, sino también uno de los teóricos de la historia más influyentes en la tradición hermenéutica de las ciencias del espíritu. Discípulo de Hegel y maestro de Dilthey, Droysen elaboró una ¿histórica¿ que pretendía exponer ¿las leyes de la investigación y del saber históricos¿. La histórica de Droysen es dos cosas a la vez: una filosofía material de la (...) historia y una metodología hermenéutica de la ciencia histórica. El presente artículo expone estos dos aspectos. (shrink)

Unlike so many present-day historians, Momigliano did not proceed according to the absolute dogmas of a new program of historical scholarship, method, or perspective. Rather, his scholarly work grew organically from the connection between personal initiatives and existential forces. Momigliano's lifelong theme was the historical dimension of the contacts among cultures, religions, and civilization. He made no absolute claims for his own method. His scholarly works are briefly summarized, including: his concern with the problematic of Johann Gustav (...) class='Hi'>Droysen's position and of Hellenism in general; his general review of the Italian investigations into Greek history and examination of the structure of the history of the Imperium Romanum; his activities during the years at Oxford; and his inaugural lecture as professor of ancient history at University College London in 1952, as well as the wide variety of individual studies which followed. Momigliano welcomed the worldwide expansion of scholarly work in his field, but saw more clearly and earlier than others the dangers that grew with the field. In his view, only the safeguarding of the historical foundations and precise knowledge of the history of historiography solidly based on them would ensure the continuation of historical scholarship. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Ideas 62.1 (2001) 17-35 [Access article in PDF] Late Antiquity and the Florentine Renaissance: Historiographical Parallels Christopher S. Celenza Aulus Gellius, at the end of the second century, shows us the type of writer who was destined to prevail, the compiler. In his Noctes Atticae he compiles without method or even without any definite end in view.... After him there is only barrenness. The (...) third century is a literary Sahara.... Thoughtless admiration for mathematics keeps up or reintroduces the mentality of magic.... In the fourth century ad Iamblichus had his brain almost turned by the science of numbers. 1 --Ferdinand Lot The rapid progress of humanism after the year 1400 paralyzed native impulses. Henceforth men looked only to antiquity for the solution of every problem, and consequently allowed literature to sink into mere quotation. 2 --Jacob Burckhardt Various aspects of late antiquity in western Europe and the Florentine Renaissance bear certain similarities which, if properly examined and contextualized, can lead to a deeper understanding of both periods--of their social as well as intellectual significance, of the manner in which politics relates to culture, and [End Page 17] of the relationship between urban life in a specific sort of milieu to the mechanisms of religious and philosophical dynamism. 3 The parallels are not always exact, but various underlying patterns are present. Here the main line of argument will be that a number of aspects of late ancient thought and of Renaissance thought (especially Renaissance Latin literature of all genres) went ignored by eighteenth- and nineteenth-century scholars, thanks to certain underlying assumptions concerning what was appropriate to investigate. These assumptions were themselves related to the combination of two major factors: romantic essentializing ideas about the nature of language, inherited from the Enlightenment, and the development in the nineteenth century of nationalist, evolutionary historiographies. The results of these developments persisted into the twentieth century and can be seen to an extent even today. Nationalist Historiographies and the Problem of Language "Gentlemen, nations are thoughts of God." So Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886) used to begin his history courses in Berlin, as Jacob Burckhardt (1818-97) later remembered. 4 While Ranke himself was concerned primarily with documentary history and the evolution of the modern state, he was also part of a larger trend in the German speaking world which sought to identify, in the study of the past, the spirit, or Geist, of a given era or people, a project which had been theorized by Hegel. Ranke and others, like Johann Gustav Droysen and August Böckh, taking their point of departure from Barthold Niebuhr and, more immediately, from Wilhelm von Humboldt, saw themselves as self-consciously transcending Hegel, basing their ideas on documentary sources as opposed to a priori theorizing. 5 But certain assumptions were similar, none more so than presuppositions relating to the Volksgeist. It is not that Ranke was relentlessly teleological; [End Page 18] history was made in the process of the unfolding of events. His primary mission was the documenting and understanding of modernity, a task which, despite their later divergences in practice, Burckhardt shared. 6 The goal was, following Niebuhr's approach in classical studies, to present history in an appealing way and in a manner useful to modernity. 7 This was bound up with a larger set of movements, encompassing the search for national identity and a tendency toward locating essential characteristics of a "people." 8 One of these characteristics was language, and a central preoccupation of scholars became the manner in which culture expressed itself through language, even as philology was becoming "the first historical discipline, the model for all other historical sciences" and the general view of scholarly fields as separate, specialized entities was growing. 9In their concern with language as a vehicle for cultural transmission and as a defining characteristic of a people, nineteenth-century scholars were the heirs of the Enlightenment. Ideas of a plurality of cultures had flourished; as it was put in the Encyclopédie, language expressed the "genius of a people." If... (shrink)

Idea for a universal history with cosmopolitan intent / Immanuel Kant -- Philosophy of history / Johann Gottfried von Herder -- What is universal history and to what end does one study it? / Friedrich Schiller -- On the task of the historian / Wilhelm von Humboldt -- Idea of universal history / Johann Gottlieb Fichte -- World history / Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel -- The ages of the world / Friedrich Wilhelm Josef Schelling -- On the epochos (...) of modern history / Leopold von Ranke -- Preface to first edition of histories on the Latin and Germanic nations / Leopold von Ranke -- Introduction to the history of the nineteenth century / Georg Gottfried Gervinus -- Outline of the principles of history / Johann Gustav Droysen -- The German ideology / Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels -- Speeches and essays / Theodor Mommsen -- Answer to the inaugural addresses / Theodor Mommsen -- On fortume and misfortune in history / Jakob Burckhardt -- Patterns and meaning in history / Wilhelm Dilthey -- The task of the historian / Heinrich von Treitschke -- The use and abuse of history / Friedrich Nietzsche -- Historism: the rise of the new historical outlook / Friedrich Meinecke -- The meaning of history / Karl Jaspers -- The problem of world history / Oswald Spengler. (shrink)

: The love of ruins has generated various epistemes and disciplines: In the sixteenth century it informed philology, in the nineteenth century historiography and criminology. Its status has changed from an allegorical one in the Renaissance to a literal, positivistic one at the beginning of the twentieth century. Johann Gustav Droysen was among the first who reflected the positivistic treatment of ruins systematically. The Prussian historiographer formulated a theory of remains including both written documents and material objects. (...) In the twentieth century the positivistic view lost its appeal for scholars. They began to question the supposed ability of ruins to access the past. The physicality of remains was no longer trusted to guide the process of memory. This disillusion in the power of remains led to a practice of mere tabulation where statistics instead of historical narrative were generated. The contemporary philosopher Giorgio Agamben proposes yet another way of dealing with remains. He liberates ruins from their materialistic shell altogether and takes them consequently in their. (shrink)

In the present paper we analyze the approach that sustains that history´s study is useful for the political activities improvement. Nowadays it is considered that the historian must not elaborate his works thinking to achieve an influence on the politics. Nevertheless, during the XIX century and previously, has been a different approach. Our reflection focus on two conspicuous works of the nineteenth century about the historical discipline: Historik by Johann G. Droysen and On the use and abuse of (...) history for life by Friedrich Nietzsche. This article dives on the moral role given to the study of history, as well as dives on the causes, postulated by both thinkers, that explain why history leads to a personal overcoming. Overcoming that subsequently rebound on the political issue. (shrink)

This article by Johannes B. Lotz, S.J., never before translated into English, describes his contacts with Martin Heidegger. First it describes his arrival, along with Karl Rahner, S.J., to pursue doctoral studies in Freiburg im Breisgau and their first experiences with the famous professor. Lotz continues his narrative by mentioning times he met with Heidegger over the subsequent forty years up to the philosopher’s death. With Gustav Siewerth, Max Müller, Bernhard Welte, and Karl Rahner, Lotz belonged to a group (...) of Catholic thinkers influenced—some more, some less—by Martin Heidegger. In Lotz’s view some of Heidegger’s ideas were already found in Aquinas, and a philosophy of Being needed to go beyond existential analysis into religion, revelation, and cultural criticism. (shrink)

This article by Johannes B. Lotz, S.J., never before translated into English, describes his contacts with Martin Heidegger. First it describes his arrival, along with Karl Rahner, S.J., to pursue doctoral studies in Freiburg im Breisgau and their first experiences with the famous professor. Lotz continues his narrative by mentioning times he met with Heidegger over the subsequent forty years up to the philosopher’s death. With Gustav Siewerth, Max Müller, Bernhard Welte, and Karl Rahner, Lotz belonged to a group (...) of Catholic thinkers influenced—some more, some less—by Martin Heidegger. In Lotz’s view some of Heidegger’s ideas were already found in Aquinas, and a philosophy of Being needed to go beyond existential analysis into religion, revelation, and cultural criticism. (shrink)

Johannes von Kries (1853-1928) left a fascinating work: As a physiologist, he had a lasting influence on research into colour perception. As a philosopher, he formulated a theory of probability which was received not only in philosophy (Hans Reichenbach, Ludwig Wittgenstein), but also in physics (Ludwig Boltzmann, Max Planck), jurisprudence (Gustav Radbruch), sociology (Alfred Schütz, Max Weber), economics (John Maynard Keynes), and belles-lettres (Robert Musil). This anthology reconstructs some central lines of reception. It contexts Kries' work in the history (...) of ideas and examines its topicality. --Page 4 cover. (shrink)

Les canevas de conférences sont à l'œuvre de Gustave Thibon ce que les esquisses sont aux toiles ou aux sculptures des artistes : souvent conçues comme simples outils de travail, elles survivent, par leur valeur intrinsèque, à leur emploi. Ainsi des textes que nous proposons ici aux lecteurs : Gustave Thibon ne les a écrits que pour lui-même, à seule fin d'affermir son discours lorsqu'il parlait en public. Précaution utile, car il improvisait beaucoup... Mais de même que la nudité du (...) trait, s'il est juste, fait ressortir le pouvoir miraculeux de la main, le dépouillement de la phrase accusera ici celui de l'intelligence. Et Gustave Thibon a l'intelligence contagieuse! Il nous donne de comprendre tout ce qu'il nous donne à comprendre. On remarquera qu'ici, où il n'est guère question que de sujets "terre à terre", sociaux ou politiques, Gustave Thibon emploie, certes, son légendaire bon sens à la juste exposition des problèmes, à la claire formulation des questions (ce qui relève d'une sorte de bon sens inspiré qui n'a vraiment rien de commun avec le gros bon sens ordinaire) mais qu'en revanche, il n'entrevoit jamais l'ombre d'une solution qui n'exige de la part des hommes un minimum d'ouverture à une autre dimension - une dimension spirituelle, religieuse, hors de laquelle tout se complique à l'infini, rien ne peut être dénoué."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)

In Platons Dialog Sophistes wird nach der Definition des Sophisten gefragt; das führt zum Begriff des Nichtseienden und schließlich unter dem Stichwort 'Dialektik' auf die Frage nach dem Seienden. Daß Platon dabei von der sophistischen Methode ausgeht, das Seiende als bloße Spitze einer Begriffspyramide zu deuten, haben seine Interpreten seit jeher als irgendwie widersprüchlich empfunden. Dieser Kommentar ist für Leser gedacht, die bereit sind, den Sophistes genau zu studieren, aber dabei einen Begleiter haben möchten, der ihnen in möglichst direkter und (...) knapper Form hilft, den oft schwierigen einzelnen Schritten zu folgen und zugleich die Übersicht über das nicht weniger schwierige Ganze zu behalten. Er will nicht in die kaum noch überschaubare wissenschaftliche Diskussion einführen, sondern nur das dort zunehmend ins Hintertreffen geratende unmittelbare Verständnis des Wortlauts sicherstellen. Er ist "kritisch", weil er zum unbefangenen Lesen anhalten möchte. Damit wendet er sich nicht gegen die idealistische Interpretation von Platons Dialogen, der Platon seinen Ruhm als Philosoph verdankt, sondern will zeigen, daß es falsch wäre, den Platon, der im Sophistes Grundlegendes u. a. über Begriffsbildung und Sprache zu sagen hat, darüber zu vernachlässigen. (shrink)

The Newman problem is a fundamental problem that threatens to undermine structural assumptions and structural theories throughout philosophy and science. Here, we consider the problem in the context of consciousness science. We introduce and discuss the problem, and explain why it is detrimental not only to structuralist assumptions, but also to theories of consciousness, if left unconsidered. However, we show that if phenomenal spaces, and mathematical structures of conscious experience more generally, are understood in the right way, the Newman problem (...) does not arise. The upshot of our paper is that consciousness science needs to be careful in which definition of structure to consider, but if it is, the Newman problem disappears. (shrink)