Why does historiography need a "philosophical view"? ——Visiting Professor Dong Lihe of the School of History of Beijing Normal University

If historical research provides people with a knowledge of history, then it is the role of historical theory to reflect on the epistemology and methodology of the cognitive activity of historical research. To a large extent, historical theory presents a philosophical view of historiography and, therefore, is also known as the philosophy of history. However, in the history of the academic development of history, scholars often have different understandings of the meaning and value of historical theory or philosophy of history. For the study of contemporary Chinese historiography, to build history with Chinese characteristics as the mission of the times, then it is a kung fu that cannot be abandoned to face up to the academic function of historical theory and improve the level of reflection of Chinese historical theory. Focusing on the relationship between historical theory and historical practice, Dong Lihe, professor of the Research Center for Historical Theory and Historiography of Beijing Normal University, was interviewed by this reporter.

　　The role of historical theory

　　China Social Science Daily: When you talk about the relationship between historical theory and historical practice, you used the rather figurative verb of "watching" and characterized historical theory as a philosophy. Why does historiography need this "philosophical view"?

　　Dong Lihe: Before discussing the relationship between historical theory and historical practice, it is necessary to first inquire about the relationship between theory and practice. The dialectical unity relationship between theory and practice exists in all fields of human activity in understanding and transforming the world, not just in the field of disciplines. Practice determines theory, and theory has a guiding role in practice. Lenin once said that without revolutionary theory, there can be no revolutionary action. Interestingly, however, people's attitudes toward theory and practice are somewhat tangled. There are some cognitive misconceptions about theory and practice, as well as the relationship between the two. Theory is often seen as empty and unrealistic, while practice is seen as down-to-earth and pragmatic. When talking about the categories of contradictions, people naturally exaggerate the opposites between them, but inadvertently despise the unity between the two.

　　In the Classical Era of the West, the reputation of theory was much better. I have made a preliminary etymological examination of the word "theory" in Western languages. The word "theory" is derived from the Greek verb theorein (noun form θεωρία, theoria) and is associated with "look at" or "view". In Plato's view, θεωρία, as a divine "contemplation", is the supreme and purest state attainable by the rational activity of man (the philosopher). Only in this realm can man "see" the true existence and thus attain "true knowledge." In this way, theory is the most realistic capture of reality. A similar concept existed in ancient China. There is a saying in the Tao Te Ching, "All things are made together, and I look at it again." In Lao Tzu's view, the law that all things race to grow and will eventually return to the fundamentals also requires "observation".

　　Plato also said that vision is the passage that brings us the greatest blessing. Aristotle also believed that the eye was the most preferred organ of human curiosity. If people had not seen the sun, moon and stars, there would be no doctrine of the universe. Vision determines the realm of thought. How far you can see, you will think as far as you want. There is some correlation between "thought" and "eye". Of course, the eyes mentioned here no longer mainly refer to the human eye, but to the "eyes of concepts", the "eyes of the mind". The theory of visual image composition. In turn, the theory can also be boiled down to visual imagery. "Watching" is not all theory, but theories all have a "watching" dimension. Theories can often be confirmed by reducing to visual images, and the so-called "seeing is believing" can only be better understood by ordinary people with the help of visual metaphors. For example, when the law of universal gravitation is mentioned, many people will flash the picture of the apple landing in their minds. Theories about the properties of light also tend to associate with particles and waves.

　　Therefore, the theory is closely related to vision, and is a "view" or "point of view". In German, "weltanschauung" as a theory of the world is actually an "anschauen" (welt). This is consistent with the English word for "world view." In the context of Chinese, what we are accustomed to call the "three views" is the "view" of the world, life, and values. In addition, the word "theory" and the word related to the theory are often used in combination with visual words, both Chinese and foreign. For example, "theoretical point of view", "theoretical perspective", "theoretical vision", "high vision", "foresight", "insight", "creative view", "insight", "insight" and so on. Verbal expression reveals the intrinsic connection between "theory" and vision.

　　As far as historical theory is concerned, there are different definitions in domestic and foreign academic circles. I equate the theory of historiography with the philosophy of history. Here, "theory", "philosophy" and "thought" are concepts of equal level, which can all be understood as a kind of "viewing". I divide the theory of historiography into two parts, one is historical theory, and the other is historiography in the narrow sense. The former is a general view of the course of historical events, and the latter is a reflection on the process of historical thinking.

　　Let's start with "historical theory." It is sometimes called the "view of history", that is, the "view of history", which is a holistic philosophical grasp of the ontology of history. "Historical theories" usually have visual characteristics. For example, when it comes to the theory of historical circulation and the historical concept of linear progress, what appears before us is the geometry of "circles" and "straight lines". The dominant concepts of the materialist view of history, the "economic base" and "superstructure", are a visual metaphor for the building. As a "point of view" of the ontology of history, historical theory has the requirement of cognitive authenticity, that is, the course of history is at least cyclical in the eyes of some people, or indeed progressive in the eyes of some people. However, the most prominent feature of historical theory lies in its ethical and aesthetic value orientation. Historical theories are not only empirical descriptions, but also transcendental norms. In other words, it conveys not only what the past really looked like, but often also indicates what history should have been, and thus has a future dimension. The materialist view of history has both empirical cognitive truth and future-oriented value idealism. Historical theory has both objectivity and subjectivity, not only laws and rationality, but also values and emotions. A different theory of history, that is, a different perspective of looking at the past, also means a different attitude and mood. Of course, humanity needs a rational and lofty view of history.

　　Let's talk about "historical theory in the narrow sense." It is sometimes referred to as the "view of historiography", that is, "the view of historiography", which is a philosophical "perspective" on the essence of historiography, focusing on the "premises" of historical thinking. Historiographical theory in the narrow sense is both epistemological and methodological. The narrow theory of historiography arose after historiography really entered the "problem horizon" of philosophy in the late 19th century. In the nearly one and a half centuries since, different narrow historical theory "paradigms" have been formed around the core question of "what is historiography". We know that the word "paradigm" comes from kuhn, the philosopher of science. The shift in the "paradigm" he refers to is actually a shift in the "perspective" of scientific development. In a paradigm of historical theory, historians either see history as a (natural) science or focus on its side as art, thus forming different "presuppositions" about the nature of historical thinking. Once these assumptions or disciplinary ideals are formed, they more or less define the historian's research horizons. For example, in the 1960s and 1970s, historical theorists such as Hayden White began to draw attention to the language of historians, especially the story and rhetoric of historiography, thus re-emphasizing the artistic aspects of historiography. Therefore, under this premise, a number of literary historical works such as "The Slaughter of the Cat" and "The Return of Martin Gail" have emerged in western historians. It is in this sense that the narrow theory of historiography has a fundamental and constitutive role in the practice of historiography.

　　Historian and philosopher of history

　　China Social Science Daily: In fact, in the academic history of history, we seem to have always felt the "vigilance" of philosophy entering the territory of history, and the philosophy of history is considered to be an "arrogance" of history. What do you think of the question of "identity" in the philosophy of history?

　　Dong Lihe: In my opinion, historical theory and historical philosophy are the same thing, but in fact, it is philosophy. Historical theory is also called "speculative philosophy of history", while historical theory in the narrow sense is called "philosophy of historiography". However, historians have different attitudes towards the terms "historical theory" and "philosophy of history." Both Chinese and foreign, people generally recognize the former because it is considered history, while the latter is somewhat rejected because it is attributed to philosophy. Behind this is a deep-seated concept of disciplinary identity or identity.

　　Since the specialization of the discipline of history in the 19th century, especially since the universal acceptance of Rank historiography, most empirical historians in the West have been trying to distinguish history from other disciplines in order to construct their own disciplinary identity. Some contemporary historians do not welcome philosophers as outsiders to point fingers at their own disciplines, fearing that the hard-won disciplinary identity will be disintegrated, thus issuing a cry similar to "philosophy please go away, we are historians". In their view, philosophy disrupts rather than facilitates their work.

　　Of course, in today's increasingly interdisciplinary trend, more and more historians have realized that the practice of creating disciplinary barriers between historiography and philosophy is untenable. Between philosophy and history, there should not be a zero-sum relationship of "more philosophy and less historiography", but a mutually reinforcing relationship of cooperation and symbiosis. Many great works are the result of research on real problems without the author being aware of the boundaries of the discipline. Marx, Durkheim, Weber, they were also philosophers, historians and sociologists. The post-structuralist Foucault, it is precisely with the attitude and method of both historians that he has put forward profound and novel insights into social-historical issues. Mr. He Zhaowu believes that although it is important to examine historical facts, it is necessary to achieve a true understanding of history. By responding to the challenges of philosophers such as Hegel, Mr. Liu Jiahe has achieved a series of profound research results in the field of comparative Chinese and Western historiography.

　　One of the reasons why historians are "wary" of the philosophy of history is that they believe that most of the philosophers of history are from philosophy and lack experience in history. In fact, the difference between historians and ordinary people is not as great as people think. As Collingwood said, history is the way everyone understands the present and the means by which everyone deals with problems. Each of us has a certain degree of historical awareness, all of which exist in history, and this has nothing to do with whether we are historians or not. Becker goes so far as to say that everyone is his own historian from the point of view of historiography as a memory of the past.

　　The distance between the philosophy of history and the historian is equally artificially exaggerated. The narrow sense of historiography, that is, the philosophy of historiography, is concerned with the premise of historians' work. Historical theory or speculative philosophy of history, as a necessary framework for historians to sort out the clutter of historical experience, is another form of presupposition. Both speculative and speculative philosophies of history each have a turning point from self (potential) to self(conscious), the former roughly beginning with Augustine and the latter much later, beginning around the late 19th century. But even at the stage of freedom, the presuppositions that govern the work of historians are always present, otherwise they would not be considered presuppositions. When Herodotus and Thucydides wrote history, they must have flashed in their minds such simple ideas as "how the historical process works" and "what a good historical writing should look like." Thus, according to Becker, everyone is his own historian, and it is reasonable to say that historians are all their own philosophers of history.

　　China Social Science Daily: From the perspective of the relationship between the ontology of history and history, how do you understand the "scientific nature" of history? When we emphasize the scientific nature, does theory have to be turned away from history?

　　Dong Lihe: In people's conception, history is an empirical or empirical discipline. Historical theory or philosophy of history, on the other hand, is more or less transcendental and transcendent, presenting a certain "top-down" externality. This is another reason why empirical historians remain "vigilant" against historical theory.

　　As far as speculative philosophy of history is concerned, great speculators such as Kant and Hegel, in pursuit of unity and sense of meaning, do consciously or unconsciously damage or distort the historical facts of "pure" experience. However, history needs to be described not only in empirical categories, but also in transcendental categories. Mr. Chen Xulu does not shy away from the "speculative" characteristics of his own history, and his famous book "Metabolism of Modern Chinese Society" is deeply loved by people. The "metabolism" theory he uses to explain social change in modern China is clearly from the field of biology. It can be said that any theory of history has a certain a priori and idealism. Moreover, even seemingly straightforward empirical concepts are difficult to avoid a priori and universality.

　　The task of the philosophy of historiography is to reflect on the characteristics of thinking that distinguish historiography from other disciplines, and it can also be said that it is a "top-down" "looking down" of the essence of history. For the time being, the "philosophy of historiography" has three main forms: "critical philosophy of history", "analytic philosophy of history" and "postmodern philosophy of history". The latter two undoubtedly belong to the "top-down" historical approach to understanding. The core content of the "analytic philosophy of history" covers the mode of legal interpretation, which is not summarized by its representative hempel through the investigation of actual historical interpretation, but the product of its scientific interpretation theory transplanted into the field of historiography; and the narrative theory and escape theory of "postmodern philosophy of history" are not mainly derived from historical research itself, but from literary criticism theory. The ideological identity of the "critical philosophy of history" is historicism, which aims to demonstrate the self-discipline of historiography, and is indeed a philosophy of historiography that is "natively born" in the garden of history. However, the assertion that "historiography is art after all" is also derived from an external philosophical perspective, examining and comparing the thinking characteristics of history and natural science. As I mentioned earlier, the presuppositions of historiography or science or art derived from these three philosophies of historiography, once established, have a "top-down" normative and borrowing effect on the work of historians.

　　In short, in the "arsenal" of the scientific methodology of history, in addition to experienced technical tools, there must be a priori philosophical weapons.

　　Enhance theoretical self-awareness

　　China Social Science Daily: Today's academic circles take the construction of history with Chinese characteristics as their academic consciousness. Echoing the mission of the times, what should be done to build a historical theory with Chinese characteristics?

　　Dong Lihe: In any discipline, if it is self-contained and conforms to the old ways, there will be stagnation or even decrease in the productivity of knowledge. As an empirical discipline obsessed with empirical facts, history is more prone to this phenomenon of involution. The innovation of historiography does not come from the accumulation and superposition of homogeneous knowledge, but from the collision and agitation of heterogeneous ideas. The generalization of philosophy can often achieve unexpected stimulating effects on the individualization of history.

　　Throughout the history of Western historiography in modern times, several major innovations in the practice of historiography have been directly or indirectly influenced by philosophical concepts. At the end of the 18th century, speculative historical philosophies appealed to coherence and unity, which aroused dissatisfaction with the scattered chronicles. As Collingwood argues, the idea of universal history breaks the narrowness of historiography, just as Newton's theory of gravitation eventually broke the narrowness of astronomy. The "postmodern philosophy of history", which emerged in the second half of the 20th century, has also played a positive role in historiography, despite its limitations. It advocates pluralism and openness, encourages historians to rethink history, changes perspectives, and thus rejuvenates historiography. The rise and prosperity of new cultural histories, gender histories, and postcolonial histories has a lot to do with the inspiration of postmodernism.

　　In the 21st century, Western historians and theorists are actively exploring new horizons while deepening postmodern issues. Some scholars began to shift their gaze from abstract language to vivid experience, memory, and emotion, which led to the "shift in memory" and contributed to the flourishing of popular historiography and emotional history. In addition, the trend of world globalization and the unprecedented changes in a century, as well as the fragmentation tendency of historiography itself, have triggered the nostalgia of historians for speculative historical philosophy and holistic concepts. The current prevalence of global history and grand history, as well as the revival of universal history, are somewhat in line with it.

　　The task and value of historical theory is to reveal the presuppositions that are comfortable in the minds of historians and make them conscious, so that they can be better studied and written in history. In the face of the ever-changing world situation, contemporary China, which is committed to national rejuvenation, needs to tell the story of its own nation well, as well as the story of harmonious coexistence and integration with other nationalities. To this end, we urgently need to accelerate the construction of history with Chinese characteristics. In order to improve the persuasiveness of academic theory and enhance the discourse power in the international historiography community, our historiography must have a high degree of theoretical consciousness. We must know not only the reasons or truths of historical ontology, but also the reasons or truths of historical understanding. The "body" of historiography requires the "bone" and "soul" of historical theory. The construction of a truly convincing history with Chinese characteristics is inseparable from historical theory.

Source: China Social Science Network - China Social Science Daily Author: Zhang Qingli

Welcome to pay attention to the WeChat public account of China Social Science Network cssn_cn for more academic information.