| Philosophies of history should concern the mankind's destiny, and the mankind's destiny is the complexity of history. Targeting the complexity of history, not the regulation of history, maybe means a newer topic and a deeper question for philosophies of history, at the same time, it means a greater possibility of recognition and comprehension the mankind' s destiny and pushing forward the human's ego- cognition, and a greater possibility of realizing the ideal that all philosophies should be philosophies of history, too. Obviously, all of them depend on a real breakthrough of the methodology.The self-conscious concepts of complexity maybe means the breakthrough has been beginning to. One hand, complexity of science as a new historic stage of science of itself, gives a new picture of the world—"the world of itself is complex in the end," and the simplicity is a mirage and appearance of the world. With"the rising of Category of complexity", the important and profound position of contingency and uncertainty has gotten much more acknowledgements. The other hand, the human's Reasion has been anti- Thought through by philosophy on the level of epistemology—Reasion, so called, only means the ability to recognize the world with all kinds of orders, sequences and structures, so, the world of itself no orders, sequences and structures may be likely covered up. Science and philosophy tell us at the same time that complexity is a new and necessary assumption for human' s Reasion. But what is the means of complexity? According to me, complexity is a broken dialectical unify between orders and no orders, sequences and no sequences, structures and no structures, and so on. But what is the means of broken? According to me, broken is dissymmetry, not... |