Osteuropa—ein Gebiet von kulturkonvergenz
Main Article Content
Abstract
The article “East Europe, a region of cultural convergence” is a more
developed form of a paper presented in the XIV Congress of Historical
Science in Bucarest (10-17 August). In it Prof. Papoulia states, agreeing
with Carl Otto Apel, that one cannot proceed in the historical sciences without a methodological syncretism. The author tries to indicate the possible
levels of research in this field, on the level of a) Understanding b) Explanation and c) Dialectic. After the clarification of the notion of East Europe, the
author believes that one must proceed to a morphological comparative study
of the “traces” which the historical and cultural evolution has left with the
purpose to catch their meaning and reach to the definition of the historical
entities of this region which more or less coincide with the ethnic différenciations, the ethnic collectivities. This approach would enable us, through a typology, to reach to the upper limits of this convergence, the new creations.
On the level of the explanation Prof. Papoulia proceeds to a more concreat
problem, she tries to find one of the main features which differentiate Eastern
from Western Europe. In W. Europe the political and sociological conditions
defined more or less the cultural evolution while in E. Europe the cultural
factor played a primordial role in the form of hellenization and “Europaization”. An explanation would consist in the definition of the interdépendance
of various factors which led to historical contradictions. The last Paragraph discusses whether the historical process on this region can be characterized as a dialectical one and in what this dialectic consists. The authour searches it in the relation^between structure ’and function and in the possibility of a new higher synthesis where most positive elements of the past could be rescued, and thus, gives a rather negative answer as to the dialectical nature of this historical process, particularly based on the negative influence of some external political factors.
developed form of a paper presented in the XIV Congress of Historical
Science in Bucarest (10-17 August). In it Prof. Papoulia states, agreeing
with Carl Otto Apel, that one cannot proceed in the historical sciences without a methodological syncretism. The author tries to indicate the possible
levels of research in this field, on the level of a) Understanding b) Explanation and c) Dialectic. After the clarification of the notion of East Europe, the
author believes that one must proceed to a morphological comparative study
of the “traces” which the historical and cultural evolution has left with the
purpose to catch their meaning and reach to the definition of the historical
entities of this region which more or less coincide with the ethnic différenciations, the ethnic collectivities. This approach would enable us, through a typology, to reach to the upper limits of this convergence, the new creations.
On the level of the explanation Prof. Papoulia proceeds to a more concreat
problem, she tries to find one of the main features which differentiate Eastern
from Western Europe. In W. Europe the political and sociological conditions
defined more or less the cultural evolution while in E. Europe the cultural
factor played a primordial role in the form of hellenization and “Europaization”. An explanation would consist in the definition of the interdépendance
of various factors which led to historical contradictions. The last Paragraph discusses whether the historical process on this region can be characterized as a dialectical one and in what this dialectic consists. The authour searches it in the relation^between structure ’and function and in the possibility of a new higher synthesis where most positive elements of the past could be rescued, and thus, gives a rather negative answer as to the dialectical nature of this historical process, particularly based on the negative influence of some external political factors.
Article Details
Issue
Section
Articles