본 학술논문은 연구 "랑케의 'wie es eigentlich gewesen'의 본래 의미와 독일 역사주의" 의 연구결과물이다.

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
https://www.riss.kr/link?id=G3795019
-
2005년
Korean
한국연구재단(NRF)
0
상세조회0
다운로드본 학술논문은 연구 "랑케의 'wie es eigentlich gewesen'의 본래 의미와 독일 역사주의" 의 연구결과물이다.
본 학술논문은 연구 "랑케의 'wie es eigentlich gewesen'의 본래 의미와 독일 역사주의" 의 연구결과물이다.
다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)
One of the most famous answers to the question how to write history is to quote Ranke's argument that historians’ duty is “simply to show, how it really was.” His statement became a motto for historicism, the first model of history as a science....
One of the most famous answers to the question how to write history is to quote Ranke's argument that historians’ duty is “simply to show, how it really was.” His statement became a motto for historicism, the first model of history as a science. However, Ranke mentioned this on the basis of historical theology, which the ultimate purpose of understanding in history was to decode 'God's secret letters'. It is an irony that Ranke built the scientific model of history on the basis of historical theology that “every epoch is immediate to God.” From this paradox, ironical meanings of German historicism appeared since Ranke. This article explains the premises of historical theology which built the meta-history of Ranke's historicism first, and then analyses the possibility of rethinking Ranke's historicism from the perspective of our post-religious period.