THE HISTORICAL ENTITY: THE HISTORY AS WHAT IS TO BE TOLD, AS WHAT IS BEEN TOLD AND AS WHAT IS BEING TOLD, IN MOVSES KHORENATSI’S HISTORICAL–SCIENTIFIC CONCEPTION

Authors

  • ROMIK KOCHARYAN ASPU after Kh. Abovyan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24234/miopap.v6i3.222

Abstract

History as such must be considered not only in all embracing or dominating generality of its concrete realizations and, possibly, in its ”non–genuine (untrue)” and so in its ”inauthentic being”, but also as an entity in its ”being adequate to itself”, by this in its “genuine (true)” and so in its “own being”, i.e. in having its truth in its being. In this perspective history as such is considered in its twofold provisional being: ”history as entity” and “the being of history”. In this article we investigate the problematic and specificity of history as of entity – the question ”What is the history?”, while the question “What is the being of the history?” would be the problem of investigation in another publication. What is narrated in the history and, as its essence, appears just as “the history”, is viewed in three planes of its being: as to be narrated – that in the hermeneutic situation “author– past” is understood and is foreseen to be said; that is been narrated –which in the hermeneutic situation “author– text – presumable reader” was interpretedly told by the author himself; as being narrated– which in the hermeneutic situation “text–reader” is understood by the reader himself and by essence – is narrated to him, and this is that understood and interpreted meaning, which is weaved by the participation as well as with the text and the reader himself.

Author Biography

ROMIK KOCHARYAN, ASPU after Kh. Abovyan

«Matenadaran», Senior Researcher,P hD in Philosophical Sciences Assistant of the Chair of Sociology and Social work, ASPU after Kh. Abovyan

References

1. ???? ???????, ???. ?. ??????????, ??., 1993:
2. ?????? ???, ?????? ???????, ???? ? ???. ????? ????????? ?????????? ?????, ?????? ?????? ????? ????????? ?? ???????? ??????? ??? ?????? ? ?????? ?????? ????????? – ??????????????????? ? ???????, ??., 1972, ?? 203–226:
3. ????? ??????, ??????? ??????????????? – ?????????????? ??????????????, ??., 1980:
4. ?????, ?????? ???????????? ??????????, ??., 1938:
5. ?????? ????????, ?????????? ?????, ??., 1991:
6. ???????? ?., ????????????? ?????????? ????????? ? ?????????, ??., 1966:
7. ???????? ?. ?., ?????? ????????? «? ????? ????????????» (?????, 1991) – ???????????? ?????????????????, ??., 2006:
8. ???–???????? ?., ???????????? ???????? ?? ??????????? ??????? ????????, ?., 1892:
9. ???–???????? ?., ???????????? ????? ???????? ?????????????, ?????, 1900:
10. ???????? ?., ????????????? ? ?????? ?????????????????????? ?. ??????? «?????? ???????????????? ?????????????» ????????????? – ????????????????? ???? ?????????, ?????????? ???????, ?????????, ??., 2013, ?? 193–197:
11. ???????? ?., ????–????? ???????? ????????????? ????????????, ??., 2006:
12. ???????? ?., ?????? ????????? ? ?????????? ?????????? – « ??????????????? ? ????????????? ????????», « ??????» ????., ??., 1913, ?. 1, ?? 141–160 ? ?. 2, ?? 110–134:
13. ???????? ?., ?????????? ??????????????? ?. ?????? ????????? ???????????? ????????????? – « ?????? ????????????», ?. 19, « ?????», ??., 2012, ?? 111–140:
14. ????????? ?. ?., ???????????? ??????????? ????? ? ??????? ??????? (V–VI ??.), ??., 1973.
15. ????? ?., “?????????????” ??????????? ???????? – ????????? ????????????, ?., 1990, ?. 345–415.
16. ?????? ?????????. ? ?????, ??????? ? ?????????? ?????????? ?????????, ?., 1979.
17. ???????. ????????????? ????? ????????, ?.,1987, ? 2–? ?? ???, ?. 1.
18. ???????? ?. ?. ???????? ???????????? ????? ? ??????? ?????? ?, ??., 1991.
19. Collingwood R. G., The Idea of History, revised edition with Lectures 1926–1928, Oxford University Press, Oxford – New York, p. 28–31, 26.
20. ?????????? ?. ??., ???? ???????. ?????????????, ?., 1980.
21. Mahé A. et J.–P., Introduction – Moïse de Khoréne, Histoire de l’ Arménie, Gallimard, 1993.
22. Ricoeur P., The hermeneutical function of distanciation – Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences, Cambridge, London. New York, 1982, p. 131–144.
23. Ricoeur P., The model of the text: meaningful action considered as a text – Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences, Cambridge, London. New York, 1982, p. 197–221.
24. Thomson R. W., Is There an Armenian Tradition of Exegesis? – Studia Patristica, vol. XLI, Orientalia: Clement, Origen, Athanasius, The Cappadocians, Chrysostom, ed. by Young F., Edwards M. and Parvis P., Leuven–Paris–Dudley, MA, 2006, p. 97–113.

Downloads

Published

2014-12-04

How to Cite

KOCHARYAN, R. . (2014). THE HISTORICAL ENTITY: THE HISTORY AS WHAT IS TO BE TOLD, AS WHAT IS BEEN TOLD AND AS WHAT IS BEING TOLD, IN MOVSES KHORENATSI’S HISTORICAL–SCIENTIFIC CONCEPTION . Main Issues Of Pedagogy And Psychology, 6(3), 144-172. https://doi.org/10.24234/miopap.v6i3.222

Issue

Section

Articles