※ [本文轉錄自 historia 看板] 作者: MRZ (LQY) 看板: historia 標題: 軍事史之史觀理論009 時間: 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. 至於史學界對於德布呂克的論述內容的看法呢﹐觀點上可以說是兩極的。先往好的 評價方向來看﹐德氏考證方式將理論與應用合二為一﹐成為日後治史之道的顯學。 再往壞的評價方向來看﹐德氏考證方式太過於注重應用方面的細節﹐反而會讓歷史 學家們對史實有先入為主之見﹐進而陷入教條主義的困境。而德氏考據方式也無法 適用於大部份的軍事史或戰爭史學者﹐因為他們並非軍事專家﹐結果只有軍事院校 才能進行德布呂克心目中的實證考據主義的實驗﹐而且很多歷史資料是沒有確切記 錄的情況下﹐德氏實驗也無法讓後人確切的了解歷史的全貌。所以過往多年以來﹐ 學術界對於德氏主張無法全然地認同與接受。而在過去的十年間(1990年代)﹐德氏 主張在軍事史學界逐漸崛起。這類實驗內容也引起了史學界對於軍事史的興趣﹐並 對過往許多軍事或史學理論﹐進行更直接的歸納整理與解釋分析。 -- 萬物皆非主，唯曼尼大神，至聖之先知，亞當史密斯。 La ilaha ill money，Adam Smith rasula'Llah 榮耀歸於曼尼。自宇宙之初成﹐貫古今與未來﹐直至永恆不滅。喀鏘！（收銀機響聲） Gloria patri Money. Sicut erat in principio, et nunc, et semper, et in saecula saeculorum.Ka-ching! --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 61.30.77.184 --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.112.250.145