何以走入歧途:史学、规范性与大屠杀之争*

北京师范大学学报(社会科学版) ›› 2020, Vol. 0 ›› Issue (4): 99-106.

何以走入歧途:史学、规范性与大屠杀之争^*

乔尼-马蒂·库卡宁¹, 冉博文² 译, 董立河² 校

1.芬兰奥卢大学历史哲学研究中心,奥卢 90560;
2.北京师范大学历史学院,北京 100875

收稿日期:2020-04-05 出版日期:2020-07-25 发布日期:2020-12-10

How to Get It Wrong:Historiography,normativity and the Holocaust debate

Jouni-Matti KUUKKANEN¹, translated by RAN Bowen², proofread by DONG Lihe²

1. Centre for Philosophical Studies of History,University of Oulu,Oulu 90560,Finland;
2. School of History,BNU,Beijing 100875,China

Received:2020-04-05 Online:2020-07-25 Published:2020-12-10

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 基于一种特定的、有关语言和知识的实用主义学说:推论主义(inferentialism),我认为史学知识即为提出正确的主张,接着讨论推论主义对经验主义提出的诸多挑战。我的主要关注点在于史家共同体所规定的、判定主张正确与否的那些规则。这是在一项个案研究的帮助下完成的。该案例处理的是大卫·欧文(David Irving)的庭审及其学术研究。它揭示了史学家应当避免的一些错误,如果他们旨在对过去提出正当的主张的话。

关键词: 经验主义, 推论主义, 实用主义, 大卫·欧文, 大屠杀

Abstract: This paper is based on a specific pragmatist account of language and knowledge:inferentialism.The suggestion is that historiographic knowledge is claiming correctly.The paper discusses the kinds of challenges that inferentialism poses for empiricism.Its main focus is on the rules of claiming correctly and incorrectly,as stipulated by the community of historians.This is done with the help of a case study dealing with the trial of David Irving and his scholarship,which exposes a number of errors that historians should avoid,if they are to make warranted claims about the past.

Key words: empiricism, inferentialism, pragmatism, David Irving, the Holocaust

中图分类号:

乔尼-马蒂·库卡宁, 冉博文, 董立河. 何以走入歧途:史学、规范性与大屠杀之争^{*[J]. 北京师范大学学报(社会科学版), 2020, 0(4): 99-106.}

Jouni-Matti KUUKKANEN, translated by RAN Bowen, proofread by DONG Lihe. How to Get It Wrong:Historiography,normativity and the Holocaust debate[J]. Journal of Beijing Normal University(Social Sciences), 2020, 0(4): 99-106.