The Problem of Historical Thinking in the Philosophical Discourse

1)在研究战争死者的纪念演讲与哲学话语和圣经语言之间柏拉图式的对立时，我们明确指出，在古代和中世纪哲学中，但在希腊思想中，对“永恒”的取向使得在历史中不可能找到任何合理性。(2)就现代哲学而言，哲学话语的历史化是否开始于德国民族主义的抵抗，如费希特的《对德意志民族的讲话》，以反对拿破仑的统治，还是康德的《判断力批判》已经通过发现人类思维的语言本质而开始了对历史哲学的阐述，这一点仍然没有定论。3)我们考察了“历史叙事理论”作为当代历史哲学形式的有效性。因此，我们确认了，这种叙事理论虽然能够有效地反对历史的教条主义哲学，但却无法批判作为“民族故事”的“民族历史”，这种“民族故事”预设并利用了历史的虚构性，在历史危机中，我们必须形成判断，并致力于某种理想的叙事。为了回答这个问题，什么样的“规则”是必要的，以证明一个人的判断，我们必须进一步深入研究自我与他者之间的关系。

1) In researching the platonic opposition between the memorial address for the war dead and the philsophical discourse and the biblical language as memory and testimoy of the life of Jesus, we made it clear that already in ancient and medieval philosophy, but in Greek thought the orientation to the "Eternal" had made it impossible to find out any rationality in history.2) As for modern philosophy, it remains unsettled whether the historicization of the philosophical discourse began with a German nationalism of resistance, like Fichtean "Speech to the German Nation", against the napoleonian rule or whether Kantian Critique of Judgement had already set about an elaboration of historical philosophy by finding out the linguistic nature of human thinking.3) We examined the validity of the "narrative theory of history" as a contemporary form of philosophy of history. As a result, we confirmed that, in spite of its validity against the dogmatic philosophy of history, this narrative theory was incapable of criticizing the "national history" as "national story" which presupposed and exploited the fictionality of history, and that, in a crisis in history, we had to form a judgement and commit ourselves to some desirable narratives. In order to answer to the question what kind of "rule" is necessary to justify one's judgement, we have further to pursue a close investigation into the relations between the Self and Other.