※ [本文转录自 historia 看板] 作者: MRZ (LQY) 看板: historia 标题: 军事史之史观理论009 时间: Fri Jan 21 10:02:27 2005 This was, in the opinion of this author, a two-edged legacy to war/warfare history. The positive element was that it created a synergetic relationship between theory and empirical research long before this became the case in most other branches of history-writing. The negative consequence was that it strongly contributed to shaping a rather cavalier attitude among many war/warfare historians to the results of empirical research, if those results did not serve to illuminate or exemplify some dogma of theory. This development was also promoted by the fact that many military/war historians had didactic functions professionally, mostly as teachers at military institutions: propounding tenets of warfare tended to be seen by them as more vital than grappling with the uncertainties and elusiveness of past reality. This pragmatic attitude to knowledge has over the years discredited the whole branch considerably in academic circles. During the last decades, however, a rise in its academic status is distinctly visible. This appears to be due indirectly to a growing interest among university historians in the study of war, and more directly to the consequential extended use of inductive—though theory-related—methods, as opposed to more deductive ones, within the branch. 至於史学界对於德布吕克的论述内容的看法呢﹐观点上可以说是两极的。先往好的 评价方向来看﹐德氏考证方式将理论与应用合二为一﹐成为日後治史之道的显学。 再往坏的评价方向来看﹐德氏考证方式太过於注重应用方面的细节﹐反而会让历史 学家们对史实有先入为主之见﹐进而陷入教条主义的困境。而德氏考据方式也无法 适用於大部份的军事史或战争史学者﹐因为他们并非军事专家﹐结果只有军事院校 才能进行德布吕克心目中的实证考据主义的实验﹐而且很多历史资料是没有确切记 录的情况下﹐德氏实验也无法让後人确切的了解历史的全貌。所以过往多年以来﹐ 学术界对於德氏主张无法全然地认同与接受。而在过去的十年间(1990年代)﹐德氏 主张在军事史学界逐渐崛起。这类实验内容也引起了史学界对於军事史的兴趣﹐并 对过往许多军事或史学理论﹐进行更直接的归纳整理与解释分析。 -- 万物皆非主，唯曼尼大神，至圣之先知，亚当史密斯。 La ilaha ill money，Adam Smith rasula'Llah 荣耀归於曼尼。自宇宙之初成﹐贯古今与未来﹐直至永恒不灭。喀锵！（收银机响声） Gloria patri Money. Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum.Ka-ching! --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 61.30.77.184 --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.112.250.145