Abstract

In this paper, Ricoeur and Foucault's theory for the interpretation of historical research for the discussion of the spindle, respectively, for the "text" and "file" two concepts discussed in the discussion were the development of the "historical interpretation" and "historical analysis" of more , Ricoeur's "historical interpretation" based on the text of the intermediary role, and thus traces the history ontology by, the historical time with cosmic time, awareness of time as the intermediary, and ultimately, the interpretation of history through the historical understanding of self-awareness. Foucault is opposed to the basic default general hermeneutics, and to take "historical analysis" approach, along the archeology of the requirements for the formation of discourse by the claim and file system ─ ─ ─ ─ analysis, Foucault's emphasis on history. " discontinuity "," anonymity ", into an emphasis on differences and pulled out the analysis of thinking outside the clues. Both methods are revealing the history of interpretation of the consciousness of the profound divide. This paper takes the interpretation theory of Paul Ricoeur and Michel Foucault as the discussion focus, in which the two themes text and archive occupy an important position. Through the contrast between the interpretation of history and the analysis of history, this paper shows that the interpretation of history assumed by Ricoeur is based on the mediation of text, furthermore this method develops an ontology of historical trace to execute by the historical time a mediation between the cosmic time and the time of consciousness; finally, the interpretation of history is taken as a self-understanding through history as the other. As for the idea of ​​Foucault, contrary to the hermeneutical method, the analysis of history takes into account the system of statements and of discourse ─ ie archive ─, according to the demand of archaeological method. Thus Foucault insists on the discontinuity and the anonymity in history, and finds a clue to the concept of the difference and to the existence of the exteriority. This methodological contrast shows a deep cleavage in the ways of studying history through hermeneutical consciousness