Explanation and Understanding as Methods of Historical and Biographical Cognition

Mykola Bakaiev
{"title":"Explanation and Understanding as Methods of Historical and Biographical Cognition","authors":"Mykola Bakaiev","doi":"10.18523/2617-1678.2021.8.3-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Traditionally, explanation is considered to be the method of natural sciences and understanding to be the method of humanities. However, this paper considers both to be methods of history. Namely, the author focuses on how explanation and understanding function in history in general and in biography in particular. Referring to biographical realm helps explicate the specifics of explanation and understanding as well as broaden the view about their uses in humanities. In the first part, the author refers to explanation and understanding in history as such. In particular, causal explanation (explanatory sketch by Karl Hempel) and rational explanation (history of ideas by Mark Bevir) are considered in the paper along with the relationship of hermeneutic notion of understanding with the two. The second part of the paper deals with the functioning of explanation and understanding in biographical research. Namely, it considers biographical understanding by Tilmann Habermas and Neşe Hatiboğlu as well as cases of causal and rational explanations in biographical research. In particular, it is shown that while causal explanation occurs in biography as explanatory sketch, it is not a separate distinct notion. It is also shown that rational explanation is used in biographical reconstructions in order to clarify the influence of particular events on beliefs of people. Based on the materials involved, the author demonstrates the specifics of explanation and understanding in biography compared to their usage in historical cognition in general.","PeriodicalId":34696,"journal":{"name":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","volume":"107 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Naukovi zapiski NaUKMA Filosofiia ta religiieznavstvo","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18523/2617-1678.2021.8.3-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Traditionally, explanation is considered to be the method of natural sciences and understanding to be the method of humanities. However, this paper considers both to be methods of history. Namely, the author focuses on how explanation and understanding function in history in general and in biography in particular. Referring to biographical realm helps explicate the specifics of explanation and understanding as well as broaden the view about their uses in humanities. In the first part, the author refers to explanation and understanding in history as such. In particular, causal explanation (explanatory sketch by Karl Hempel) and rational explanation (history of ideas by Mark Bevir) are considered in the paper along with the relationship of hermeneutic notion of understanding with the two. The second part of the paper deals with the functioning of explanation and understanding in biographical research. Namely, it considers biographical understanding by Tilmann Habermas and Neşe Hatiboğlu as well as cases of causal and rational explanations in biographical research. In particular, it is shown that while causal explanation occurs in biography as explanatory sketch, it is not a separate distinct notion. It is also shown that rational explanation is used in biographical reconstructions in order to clarify the influence of particular events on beliefs of people. Based on the materials involved, the author demonstrates the specifics of explanation and understanding in biography compared to their usage in historical cognition in general.
作为历史与传记认知方法的解释与理解
传统上,被认为是自然科学的方法解释和理解人文学科的方法。然而,本文认为两者都是历史的方法。即,作者着重于如何解释和理解函数一般在历史上,特别是在传记。参考传记领域有助于阐明解释和理解的具体内容,并拓宽其在人文学科中的应用视野。在第一部分中,作者将历史上的解释和理解称为解释和理解。本文特别考虑了因果解释(卡尔·亨佩尔的解释性素描)和理性解释(马克·贝维尔的思想史),以及解释学理解概念与两者的关系。第二部分论述了解释和理解在传记研究中的作用。也就是说,它考虑了哈贝马斯和纽 Hatiboğlu的传记理解,以及传记研究中因果和理性解释的案例。特别是,它表明,虽然因果解释发生在传记作为解释性草图,它不是一个单独的截然不同的概念。研究还表明,为了澄清特定事件对人们信仰的影响,在传记重建中使用了理性解释。根据所涉及的材料,作者论证了在传记中解释和理解的特殊性,而不是它们在一般历史认知中的使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信