【摘要】 在《文明论的历史哲学》视阈中，现代性危机在历史意识层面的表现是当下主义的兴起，它意味着作为生存视野的历史意识之退隐。现代历史意识的问题起源于一种反历史的历史意识，后者在以犹太-基督宗教为背景的普遍历史叙事中有其文明论根源。这种普遍历史叙事在反向意义上导致了三重结果：一是历史主义，二是相对主义，三是当下主义。进一步检讨这种反历史的普遍历史的起源，可将之上溯到各大文明自我奠基的“天下时代”。当前人类处在“新天下时代”的前夜，重新激活历史意识，需要一种超越进步主义叙事且以“文质彬彬”为归宿的新文明观。这种对未来具有崭新意义的新文明在中国思想脉络中有其根基。更多还原

【Abstract】 In The Philosophy of History with a Civilizational Approach,the author investigates the crisis of modernity through the retreat of historical consciousness. This crisis signifies not the disappearance of history itself,but rather the collapse of historical consciousness—understood as the existential horizon that opens the present by linking past and future. Consequently,“the end of history”does not represent a cessation of events,but the exhaustion of the very condition that allows historical meaning to emerge.The modern pathology of “the end of history ” is rooted in a particular mode of historical consciousness,which finds its civilizational and theoretical origin in the universal historical narrative shaped by the Judeo-Christian tradition. This narrative ultimately manifests as a rejection of history itself,demanding its consummation to prepare the way for an ahistorical,absolute eternity. In doing so,it posits this historical culmination as the self-realization of the Absolute—a teleological necessity that presupposes the inherent meaninglessness of history,whose value is conferred solely by the Absolute.Paradoxically, however, this absolutist orientation of universal history gives rise to three unintended consequences:( 1) historicism,( 2) relativism,and( 3) presentism. Historicism emerges as a reaction against abstract intellectualism and its effort to construct a transparent,universal model of the world and human nature,and it reclaims history as the essential horizon for understanding human affairs and affirms the irreducible uniqueness of historical phenomena( in contrast to natural ones). In turn,relativism undermines all claims to stability,leading to a value-theoretical impasse—a “clash of the Titans”in which no normative ground can prevail. Presentism,as a dominant historical regime,functions by enclosing historical consciousness within the “cave of the present ”,thereby severing temporal continuity and precluding meaningful engagement with the past and future. It represents the most recent—and perhaps most insidious—symptom of the pathology of the end-of-history. Only by reopening itself to both past and future can the individual and society reemerge as products of historical becoming,embedded in cultural memory and oriented toward genuine human existence.Ironically,the very historical consciousness that now rejects history is itself rooted in the “Age of Tianxia”( Ecumenic Age),a period when the foundations of the world’s major civilizations were laid.This epoch marks a rupture with the primordial cosmological order and gives rise to both transcendental and historical consciousness,along with their symbolic forms. Within this Ecumenic Age,three major civilizations—China,ancient Greece, and Israel—each developed distinct modalities of historical consciousness. The Greeks,through the development of philosophical symbols,relegated history to the periphery of universal knowledge,subordinating it to metaphysical abstraction. The Israelites,by contrast,viewed history as a provisional and ultimately meaningless process,valuable only insofar as it pointed toward divine fulfillment. Only in the Chinese Ecumenic Age was historical consciousness affirmed as intrinsically meaningful— valued not merely as a vehicle for something else,but as an end in itself. This divergence also helps explain why the Greek and Israelite traditions later converged—on the shared basis of historical consciousness—to jointly shape the contours of modern Western historical thought. By contrast,the Chinese tradition offers a different path. At its core lies the idea that the essence of history is the manifestation of wen 文( form) : the dynamic interplay between human subjectivity and cultural form,through which wen is brought into ming 明( enlightenment). Today,humanity stands on the threshold of a “Neo-Ecumenic Age”. The revival of historical consciousness calls for a new civilizational horizon—one that transcends linear,progressivist narratives and takes as its telos the harmonious integration of zhi 质( substance) and wen,as embodied in the Confucian ideal of wenzhi binbin 文质彬彬( a harmonious balance between substance and form). This vision of a renewed civilization—both forward-looking and deeply rooted—finds its philosophical foundations in the Chinese intellectual tradition.更多还原