메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
崔成哲 (서강대학교)
저널정보
역사학회 역사학보 歷史學報 第194輯
발행연도
2007.6
수록면
363 - 392 (30page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The 'Critique of the Present' (Zeitkritik) is defined in general as a work to expose characteristics, values, evils, and problems of the present time from a historical or above-historical standpoint, in comparison with the past and the future, or in contrast to the Absolute (preassumed idealized conditions). This work has been done mostly by philosophers like Heracleitos, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Marx, and Nietzsche. But it is rather suitable for historians than for philosophers, for the 'Critique of the Present' means in a pure sense an evaluation of the present time on the basis of history. This article aims at examining the interrelationship closely between the 'Critique of the present' and the study of history by studying cases of such "present-critical historians" as Polybios, Tocqueville, Burckhardt, and Huizinga.
From this case study, it is proved that these historians felt their own times always as a big crisis, set a norm for their critical work, diagnosed problems of their own times as symptoms to be healed, and prognosticated prospects and directions of the present. So in Burckhardt, who preferred tne elite culture and classical art of the old europe, we can see a "conservative critique of the present" in Polybios and Tocqueville, who tried to sketch an optimistic picture of the future, a "progressive critique of the present" in Huizinga, who planned a new cultural life by criticising the cultural pattern of his own age, a "critique of culture." In this sense, the 'Critique of the Present' had a decisive impact on the shaping of their own philosophical view of history. Futhermore the critique filtered in various ways into their historical study and historiography: the selection of the subject of study, the problem of historical knowledge and judgement, the mind and mode of the critique of historical material, and forms and contents of historiography. All these elements, in brief historical methodology, resulted directly or indirectly from their critical view of the present. Finally this critique contributed to their theoretical insight into various spheres of man's life of which history consists: politics, society, culture, and art. From here diverse related theories sprang out: historical theory of politics and society (Polybios, Tocqueville) came from historical critique of politics and society, historical theory of culture and art (Burckhardt, Huizinga) from historical critique of culture and art.
It seems to be clear that the 'Critique of the Present' as an important motive and element of the study of history must be studied profoundly and continuously.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 현재비판과 역사철학
Ⅲ. 현재비판과 역사방법론
Ⅳ. 현재비판과 역사외적 이론
Ⅴ. 맺음말
〈Abstract〉

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-911-002851679