The Problem of Historical Thinking in the Philosophical Discourse

1)在研究战争死者的纪念地址和哲学话语之间的柏拉图式的对立和圣经语言作为记忆和见证耶稣的生活，我们清楚地表明，已经在古代和中世纪的哲学，但在希腊思想的取向“永恒”已经不可能找到任何合理性的历史。2）至于现代哲学，哲学话语的历史化是否始于德国民族主义的抵抗，如费希特的《对德意志民族的演讲》，是否反对拿破仑的统治，或者康德的《判断力批判》是否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。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，尽管这种叙事理论对独断的历史哲学是有效的，但它无法批评作为“国家故事”的“国家历史”，这种“国家故事”预设并利用了历史的虚构性，并且在历史危机中，我们必须形成判断并致力于一些可取的叙事。为了回答什么样的“规则”是证明一个人的判断是必要的这个问题，我们必须进一步对自我和他者之间的关系进行密切的调查。

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.