《把过去当作活生生的伤口:威廉·詹姆斯与历史哲学》

IF 0.4 3区历史学 Q1 HISTORY

Journal of the Philosophy of History Pub Date : 2019-11-22 DOI:10.1163/18722636-12341431

Bonnie Sheehey

{"title":"《把过去当作活生生的伤口:威廉·詹姆斯与历史哲学》","authors":"Bonnie Sheehey","doi":"10.1163/18722636-12341431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPhilosophers generally recognize pragmatism as a philosophy of progress. For many commentators, pragmatism is linked to a notion of historical progress through its embrace of meliorism – a forward-looking philosophy that places hope in the future possibility of improvement. This paper calls pragmatism’s progressivism into question by outlining an alternative account of meliorism in the work of William James. Drawing on his ethical writings from the 1870s and 1880s, I argue that James’s concept of hope does not imply an embrace of historical progress, but remains detached from such a notion precisely insofar as it relies on a non-progressive temporality that encourages a rethinking of historical change. This form of hope is significant, I suggest, for the work of conceptualizing a non-progressive pragmatist approach to history and historiography.","PeriodicalId":43541,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Philosophy of History","volume":"13 1","pages":"325-342"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18722636-12341431","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"To Bear the Past as a Living Wound: William James and the Philosophy of History\",\"authors\":\"Bonnie Sheehey\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18722636-12341431\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPhilosophers generally recognize pragmatism as a philosophy of progress. For many commentators, pragmatism is linked to a notion of historical progress through its embrace of meliorism – a forward-looking philosophy that places hope in the future possibility of improvement. This paper calls pragmatism’s progressivism into question by outlining an alternative account of meliorism in the work of William James. Drawing on his ethical writings from the 1870s and 1880s, I argue that James’s concept of hope does not imply an embrace of historical progress, but remains detached from such a notion precisely insofar as it relies on a non-progressive temporality that encourages a rethinking of historical change. This form of hope is significant, I suggest, for the work of conceptualizing a non-progressive pragmatist approach to history and historiography.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43541,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Philosophy of History\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"325-342\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/18722636-12341431\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Philosophy of History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18722636-12341431\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Philosophy of History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18722636-12341431","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

哲学家们普遍认为实用主义是一种进步哲学。对许多评论家来说，实用主义通过其对改良主义的拥抱而与历史进步的概念联系在一起，改良主义是一种前瞻性的哲学，对未来的改进可能性寄予希望。本文通过概述威廉·詹姆斯作品中对改良主义的另一种解释，对实用主义的进步主义提出了质疑。根据詹姆斯在19世纪70年代和19世纪80年代的伦理著作，我认为詹姆斯的希望概念并不意味着对历史进步的拥抱，而是与这样一个概念保持分离，因为它依赖于一种鼓励重新思考历史变化的非进步的时间性。我认为，这种形式的希望对于概念化非进步实用主义的历史和史学方法来说意义重大。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

To Bear the Past as a Living Wound: William James and the Philosophy of History

Philosophers generally recognize pragmatism as a philosophy of progress. For many commentators, pragmatism is linked to a notion of historical progress through its embrace of meliorism – a forward-looking philosophy that places hope in the future possibility of improvement. This paper calls pragmatism’s progressivism into question by outlining an alternative account of meliorism in the work of William James. Drawing on his ethical writings from the 1870s and 1880s, I argue that James’s concept of hope does not imply an embrace of historical progress, but remains detached from such a notion precisely insofar as it relies on a non-progressive temporality that encourages a rethinking of historical change. This form of hope is significant, I suggest, for the work of conceptualizing a non-progressive pragmatist approach to history and historiography.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Journal of the Philosophy of History Multiple-

CiteScore

1.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Philosophy of history is a rapidly expanding area. There is growing interest today in: what constitutes knowledge of the past, the ontology of past events, the relationship of language to the past, and the nature of representations of the past. These interests are distinct from – although connected with – contemporary epistemology, philosophy of science, metaphysics, philosophy of language, and aesthetics. Hence we need a distinct venue in which philosophers can explore these issues. Journal of the Philosophy of History provides such a venue. Ever since neo-Kantianism, philosophy of history has been central to all of philosophy, whether or not particular philosophers recognized its potential significance.