A HISTORICAL STUDY ON THE REPRESENTATIONS OF REASON IN ENGLISH LITERATURE

我们的研究主要围绕以下两个问题展开：(1)在构建作为人类故事的“历史”的过程中，既有“循环”的观点，也有“线性”的概念。前者起源于古典古代，后者在犹太救世史上有其起点和终点。在这两种情况下，都有必要对那些本质上是“偶然性”的“历史”事件和事件作出合理的解释。在前一种情况下，“理性”试图在循环运动中看到“重复”的结构，她积极地将其作为历史认识和理解的原则。然而，与此同时，“重复”结构也有可能带来一种虚无主义的历史观。在后一种情况下，它的“线性”结构，由于上帝的专断干预，基本上必须被认为是“非理性的”，被表现为黑格尔的“理性的狡猾”。这种观点是建立在“线性”结构已经“世俗化”并转化为现代“进步”观念的历史假设基础上的。(2)如果理性的现代表征在黑格尔的“绝对精神”这样的“概念结构”中被赋予了象征性的表述，同时又必然要面对一些重大的政治问题，那么“后现代性”中的“历史理性”就不可避免地要警惕任何形式的政治权力。同时，它必须努力建立自己的原则或基础，与各种形式的媒体有关，这些媒体的势头越来越强。“后现代性”中的这种“历史理性”已经表现为类似“差异”的东西，德里达发现了“权力”和“知识”之间的差异，并以一种巧妙的方式向我们展示了这一点。

Our research is mainly conducted around the following two problematics.(1) In constructing a "history" as the story of human beings, there have been as bssic structures both the "cyclic" view and the "linear" conception. The former originates in Classical Antiquity and the latter, having its beginning and end, in the Jewish salvation history. In both instances, it is necessary to present a reasonable explanation of those "historical" events and affairs, which are by their nature essentially "accidantal." In the former case, "reason" tries see in the cyclic movements the "repetitive" structure, which she adopts positively as a principle in historical recognition and understanding. At the same time, however, there is a possibility in which the "repetitive" structure, taken negatively, brings about a nihilistic historical outlook. In the latter case, its "linear" structure, which must essentially be regarded as "irrational" because of God's arbitrary intervention, comes to be represented as Hegel's "cunning of reason." This view is based on the historical assumption that the "linear" structure has been "secularized" and transformed into the modern idea of "progress."(2) If the modern representations of reason is given a symbolic expression in such a "conceptual structure" as the Hegelian "absolute spirit, " and at the same time is bound to face some of the important major political issues, then the "historical reason" in "post-modernity" should inevitably be on guard against any form of political power. At the same time, it must try to establish its own priciple or foundation in relation to various forms of media, which has increasingly gained their momentum. This "historical reason" in "post-modernity" has come to be represented something like "difference, " which Derrida detects between "power" and "knowledge" and shows us in an ingenious manner.