The Relationship between History and Understanding from the Perspective of the German Historical School

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

In the nineteenth century, special attention was given to history and its relationship with understanding. Initially, Hegel, adopting a philosophical and meta-historical perspective on history grounded in an a priori and teleological principle, viewed the movement of history as deterministic yet progressing toward perfection. However, the emergence of the German Historical School in the nineteenth century arose as a reaction to Hegel’s philosophy of history. Ranke, Droysen, and Dilthey, the founders of this school, firmly maintained that the history of the world should not be understood through an a priori or meta-historical framework, arguing that humans, as historical beings, cannot observe the course of history from a meta-historical standpoint. Consequently, the Historical School, by connecting the understanding of history to hermeneutics, deemed the comprehension of world history possible only some posteriori, relying on empirical research. Furthermore, concerning the possibility of understanding past historical periods, the Historical School emphasized that an objective understanding of earlier eras is feasible only if we interpret the past not by our contemporary standards but by the standards of those times. Nevertheless, the Historical School encountered two significant challenges. The first was the prevailing belief in human historicity, which considered an objective understanding of the past unattainable. The more substantial issue was that, by rejecting God or Spirit as meta-historical factors determining historical events, the Historical School struggled to justify the coherence and unity of history. This article will elucidate the perspectives of Ranke and Droysen on how history should be understood while also addressing the criticisms directed at them.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Assis, A. A. (2014). What is History for, Berghahn Books.
Bleicher, J. (1980). Contemporary Hermeneutics, Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Droysen, J. G. (1897). Outline of the Principle of History, translation by E. Benjamin Andrews, GINN & COMPANY.
Gadamer, H. G. (2004). Truth and Method, translation by J. Weinsheimer & D. G. Marshall, Continuum Publishing Group.
Hegel, G. W. F. (1977). Phenomenology of Spirit, translated by A. V. Miller, Oxford University Press.
Hegel, G. W. F. (1977). Reason in History, translated by H. Enayat. Tehran, Scientific Publications of the University of Technology. (In Persian)
Hegel, G. W. F. (2017). Lectures on the History of Philosophy, translated by E. Malak-Esmaili. Tehran, Negah Publication. (In Persian)
Julien, F. (1993). The Theories of Human Sciences, translated by A. M. Kardan. Tehran, Academic Publication Center. (In Persian)
Ranke, L. V. (1881). Weltgeschichte, Leipzig, Duncker & Humblot.
Ranke, L. V. (1981). The Secret of World History; Selected Writings on the Art and Science of History, Fordham University Press.
Shirt, E. (2008). The Philosophy of the Continental Social Sciences, translated by H. Jalili. Tehran, Ney Publication. (In Persian)
Warnke, G. (2023). Gadamer: Hermeneutics, Tradition and Reason, translated by A. Vaezi. Tehran, Ney Publication. (In Persian)
Weinsheimer, J. C. (1985). Gadamer’s Hermeneutics, Yale University Press.
Send comment about this article
CAPTCHA Image
Journal of Philosophical Investigations
Volume 19, Issue 52 - Serial Number 52
Articles
52 Autumn 2025
November 2025
Pages 631-652

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics