是否存在严肃的反事实历史?  

Is There any Serious Counterfactual History?

作　　者：陈常燊 Chen Changshen

机构地区：[1]山西大学哲学社会学学院

出　　处：《思想与文化》2022年第1期263-276,共14页Thought & Culture

基　　金：国家社科基金重点项目“分析的西方哲学史研究”(项目编号:19AZX013)

摘　　要：围绕是否能将反事实条件分析严肃地运用于历史研究这一问题,当代历史学界和哲学界的一个主流观点,即“限制主义的实在论”,主张反事实历史陈述是严肃的,但必须附加某些限制条件。经过对这些限制条件的逐一考察,我们在现有的反实在论方案基础上,提出了一种与之兼容的“温和紧缩论”方案:我们认为,并不存在严肃的反事实历史陈述,即便为之添加一些限制条件也无济于事,尽管严肃的事实历史陈述仍然是可能的。究其缘由,反事实历史的“最小改动”与“余者皆同”这两个原则彼此难以连贯;反事实推理的“语境敏感”与反事实条件的“动机敏感”相互冲突。As to whether counterfactual historical statements can be applied seriously to historical studies,a competitive view in contemporary historians,namely“restrictionist realism”argues that counterfactual historical statements are serious,but must be subject to certain restrictions.Based on the existing anti-realism approach,this paper proposes a compatible with“moderate deflationism”:we believe that there is no serious counterfactual history statement,even add some constraints also of no help for it,despite the serious facts of history it is still possible.The reason for this is that the two principles of counterfactual history,“minimal change”and“ceteris paribus law”,are incoherent with each other.The context sensitivity of counterfactual reasoning conflicts with the motivation sensitivity of counterfactual conditions.

关 键 词：反事实历史 实在论 反实在论 历史哲学 

分 类 号：K01[历史地理—历史学]