Beiser Fred
Department of Philosophy, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244, USA.
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2008 Dec;39(4):554-64. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2008.09.002.
This article treats the conflict between historicism and neo-Kantianism in the late nineteenth century by a careful examination of the writings of Wilhelm Windelband, the leader of the Southwestern neo-Kantians. Historicism was a profound challenge to the fundamental principles of Kant's philosophy because it seemed to imply that there are no universal and necessary principles of science, ethics or aesthetics. Since all such principles are determined by their social and historical context, they differ with each culture and epoch. Windelband attempted to respond to the challenge of this relativism by either broadening Kantian principles, so that they could accommodate the results of historicism, or by reformulating Kantian principles, so that they were impregnable to historical change. The article examines both aspects of Windelband's strategy in some detail, noting the many changes and different formulations in his views. A final section considers some of the difficulties of Windelband's strategy and concludes that, despite its heroic efforts, it was a failure.
本文通过仔细研究西南新康德主义学派领袖威廉·文德尔班的著作,探讨了19世纪后期历史主义与新康德主义之间的冲突。历史主义对康德哲学的基本原则构成了深刻挑战,因为它似乎意味着不存在科学、伦理或美学的普遍必然原则。由于所有这些原则都由其社会和历史背景所决定,它们因文化和时代的不同而各异。文德尔班试图通过拓宽康德主义原则以使其能容纳历史主义的成果,或者重新表述康德主义原则以使它们不受历史变化的影响,来回应这种相对主义的挑战。本文详细考察了文德尔班策略的这两个方面,注意到他观点中的诸多变化和不同表述。最后一部分考虑了文德尔班策略所面临的一些困难,并得出结论:尽管付出了巨大努力,但它还是失败了。