{"title":"ISAIAH BERLIN AS A HISTORIAN","authors":"HUBERT CZYŻEWSKI","doi":"10.1111/hith.12272","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Intellectual history's methodology remains dominated by the Cambridge school and its approaches, which focus almost exclusively on the discursive context of political debates. However, a different practice of historical investigation may be found in the works of Isaiah Berlin. Although he is best known as a political theorist and an ethicist, Berlin pursued his philosophical agenda mostly through his works in the history of ideas that focus on Enlightenment and Romantic thinkers. Nonetheless, this methodology has never been presented in a systematic way—not by Berlin, and not in scholarship on his thought. This article argues that Berlin's understanding of past philosophers was different from that of the Cambridge school: he did not neglect the fundamental importance of historical context, but he did not understand the “context” primarily as comprised of interventions in political discourse; rather, he attempted to understand every thinker in his or her own right. Berlin's methodology as a historian can be summarized as an empathetic reconstruction of somebody else's mental world, and it was derived from the idea of <i>fantasia</i>, which was developed by the early modern Italian writer Giambattista Vico (who is a protagonist in many of Berlin's historical essays), and from the concept of “absolute presuppositions,” which was forged by R. G. Collingwood. Berlin's methodology allows for more in-depth comparisons between thinkers from different historical periods, as his approaches were founded on a philosophical belief in the existence of a transhistorical human nature that is confined by a horizon of shared human experiences.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47473,"journal":{"name":"History and Theory","volume":"61 3","pages":"450-468"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History and Theory","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hith.12272","RegionNum":2,"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
Abstract
Intellectual history's methodology remains dominated by the Cambridge school and its approaches, which focus almost exclusively on the discursive context of political debates. However, a different practice of historical investigation may be found in the works of Isaiah Berlin. Although he is best known as a political theorist and an ethicist, Berlin pursued his philosophical agenda mostly through his works in the history of ideas that focus on Enlightenment and Romantic thinkers. Nonetheless, this methodology has never been presented in a systematic way—not by Berlin, and not in scholarship on his thought. This article argues that Berlin's understanding of past philosophers was different from that of the Cambridge school: he did not neglect the fundamental importance of historical context, but he did not understand the “context” primarily as comprised of interventions in political discourse; rather, he attempted to understand every thinker in his or her own right. Berlin's methodology as a historian can be summarized as an empathetic reconstruction of somebody else's mental world, and it was derived from the idea of fantasia, which was developed by the early modern Italian writer Giambattista Vico (who is a protagonist in many of Berlin's historical essays), and from the concept of “absolute presuppositions,” which was forged by R. G. Collingwood. Berlin's methodology allows for more in-depth comparisons between thinkers from different historical periods, as his approaches were founded on a philosophical belief in the existence of a transhistorical human nature that is confined by a horizon of shared human experiences.
思想史的方法论仍然由剑桥学派及其方法所主导,这些方法几乎完全集中在政治辩论的话语背景上。然而,在以赛亚·伯林的作品中可以发现一种不同的历史调查实践。虽然他最出名的身份是政治理论家和伦理学家,但伯林主要通过他的思想史作品来追求他的哲学议程,这些作品主要关注启蒙运动和浪漫主义思想家。尽管如此,这种方法论从来没有以系统的方式呈现过——柏林没有,他的思想也没有学术研究。本文认为,柏林对过去哲学家的理解不同于剑桥学派:他没有忽视历史语境的根本重要性,但他没有将“语境”主要理解为政治话语中的干预;相反,他试图理解每一位思想家各自的观点。作为一名历史学家,伯林的方法论可以概括为对他人精神世界的共情重建,它源于意大利早期现代作家詹巴蒂斯塔·维科(Giambattista Vico)(他是伯林许多历史文章的主角)发展起来的幻想曲概念,以及r·g·科林伍德(R. G. Collingwood)提出的“绝对预设”概念。柏林的方法允许对不同历史时期的思想家进行更深入的比较,因为他的方法是建立在一种哲学信仰之上的,即存在一种被人类共同经历的视野所限制的超历史人性。
期刊介绍:
History and Theory leads the way in exploring the nature of history. Prominent international thinkers contribute their reflections in the following areas: critical philosophy of history, speculative philosophy of history, historiography, history of historiography, historical methodology, critical theory, and time and culture. Related disciplines are also covered within the journal, including interactions between history and the natural and social sciences, the humanities, and psychology.