Aaron Turner

The fundamental principle of Hans Blumenberg’s concept of Modernity is “immanent self-assertion,” through which the modern human being identifies within itself the possibilities of transforming or re-constructing the world according to a human order. “Immanent self-assertion” is a product of human progress and is conditioned by the historical development of theoretical curiosity. In this article, it is argued that Blumenberg’s concept of Modernity is founded on a misinterpretation of Epicurean ataraxia, which is traditionally defined as “freedom from anxiety” and which Blumenberg himself characterizes as “dispassionate ease.” For Blumenberg, ataraxia epitomizes the limitations of theoretical curiosity before the modern era. Where Blumenberg identifies “immanent self-assertion” as the means of extending absolute influence over the world through the subjugation of nature, it is argued that Epicurean worldliness resides within a sense of self-mastery against the radical contingency of tuchē (for-tune) that defines the world order.Le principe fondamental du concept de modernité de Hans Blumen-berg est « l’affirmation de soi immanente», par laquelle l’être humain moderne identifie en lui-même les possibilités de transformer ou de reconstruire le monde selon l’ordre humain. « L’affirmation de soi immanente » est un produit du progrès humain, conditionnée par le développement historique de la curiosité théorique. Dans cet article, on avance que le concept de modernité de Blumenberg est fondé sur une interprétation erronée du ataraxia épicurien, défini traditionnellement comme « l’absence d’anxiété » et que Blumenberg lui-même qualifie de « facilité impartiale ». Pour Blumenberg, ataraxia incarne les limites de la curiosité théorique avant l'ère moderne. Là où Blumenberg identifie « l’affirmation de soi immanente » comme le moyen d'étendre une influence absolue sur le monde par la subjugation de la nature, il est soutenu que la mondanité épicurienne réside dans un sentiment de maîtrise de soi contre la contingence radicale de tuchē qui définit l'ordre mondial.

This book brings together historical thinkers from a variety of disciplinary backgrounds to offer original interpretations of the essence of history. It addresses why it is that the essence of history itself cannot be so easily thematised or conceptualised. Restating the question of the essence of history is necessary because today it has largely been forgotten. Since Antiquity, history has been inextricably bound up with the problem of truth. Contemporary philosophy of history and historiography has branched out in many different directions. This complexity has made it nearly impossible for historical thinkers to engage outside of their own field. The relentless advancement of historical thought has almost completely neglected the question of the essence of history. The chapters in this volume respond to questions such as: What is history? What, in the 'progress' of historical thought from antiquity to modernity, did we lose along the way? And what does it mean, if it means anything at all, to have history, to be historical? The Essence of History will be of interest to scholars and graduate students working in philosophy of history, historical theory and historiography, and ancient history.

The fundamental principle of Hans Blumenberg’s concept of Modernity is “immanent self-assertion,” through which the modern human being identifies within itself the possibilities of transforming or re-constructing the world according to a human order. “Immanent self-assertion” is a product of human progress and is conditioned by the historical development of theoretical curiosity. In this article, it is argued that Blumenberg’s concept of Modernity is founded on a misinterpretation of Epicurean ataraxia, which is traditionally defined as “freedom from anxiety” and which Blumenberg himself characterizes as “dispassionate ease.” For Blumenberg, ataraxia epitomizes the limitations of theoretical curiosity before the modern era. Where Blumenberg identifies “immanent self-assertion” as the means of extending absolute influence over the world through the subjugation of nature, it is argued that Epicurean worldliness resides within a sense of self-mastery against the radical contingency of tuchē that defines the world order.Le principe fondamental du concept de modernité de Hans Blumen-berg est « l’affirmation de soi immanente», par laquelle l’être humain moderne identifie en lui-même les possibilités de transformer ou de reconstruire le monde selon l’ordre humain. « L’affirmation de soi immanente » est un produit du progrès humain, conditionnée par le développement historique de la curiosité théorique. Dans cet article, on avance que le concept de modernité de Blumenberg est fondé sur une interprétation erronée du ataraxia épicurien, défini traditionnellement comme « l’absence d’anxiété » et que Blumenberg lui-même qualifie de « facilité impartiale ». Pour Blumenberg, ataraxia incarne les limites de la curiosité théorique avant l'ère moderne. Là où Blumenberg identifie « l’affirmation de soi immanente » comme le moyen d'étendre une influence absolue sur le monde par la subjugation de la nature, il est soutenu que la mondanité épicurienne réside dans un sentiment de maîtrise de soi contre la contingence radicale de tuchē qui définit l'ordre mondial.

The distinction between ancient and modern modes of historical thought is characterized by the growing complexity of the discipline of history in modernity. Consequently, the epistemological and methodological standard of ancient historiography is typically held as inferior against the modern ideal. This book serves to address this apparent deficit. Its scope is three-fold. Firstly, it aims at encountering ancient modes of historical and historiographical thought within the province of their own horizon. Secondly, this book considers the possibility of a dialogue between ancient and modern philosophies of history concerning the influence of ancient historical thought on the development of modern philosophy of history and the utility of modern philosophy of history in the interpretation of ancient historiography. Thirdly, this book explores the continuities and discontinuities in historical method and thought from antiquity to modernity. Ultimately, this volume demonstrates the necessity of re-evaluating our assumptions about the relation of ancient and modern historical thought and lays the groundwork for a more fruitful dialogue in the future.