ABSTRACT In my essay, I analyze Schelling’s and Rosenzweig’s commitment to the narrative philosophy as a unique method of telling a philosophical story. I want to understand what such “philosophical story” means and how it differs from the conceptual approach, here represented by Hegel. I also want to see how it connects with Schelling’s another project continued by Rosenzweig, of doing “positive philosophy”: in what way does positivity imply narrativity? Is this a necessary implication? And, last but not least, I want to explore the theological dimension of the narrative project. I perceive Schelling’s, and then Rosenzweig’s goal as an attempt to oppose Hegel’s double manoeuvre of sublation – of temporal contingency and religion – by returning to the narrative which recovers the actuality of both elements and sees the necessary connection between them. The living experience of history is strictly linked to the religious stories telling the life of the “living God,” who is emphatically not the “God of the system.” Theosophy and its narrative way of creating a suspense and then inscribing it into a metaphysical drama which plays itself out on the arena of history reveals the deep connection between living historical temporality and religious imagery.

中文翻译：

---

“故事还在继续……”谢林和罗森茨威格谈叙事哲学

摘要在我的文章中，我分析了谢林和罗森茨威格对叙事哲学的承诺，这是一种讲述哲学故事的独特方法。我想了解这种“哲学故事”的含义以及它与黑格尔所代表的概念方法的区别。我还想看看它与罗森茨威格（Rosnzweig）继续进行的谢林（Schelling）的另一个项目之间的联系，该项目是做“积极哲学”的：以什么方式暗示叙事？这是必要的含义吗？最后但并非最不重要的一点是，我想探讨叙事项目的神学方面。我觉得谢林的 然后，罗森茨威格的目标是通过返回到叙事中来反对黑格尔的双重化，即暂时的偶然性和宗教化，从而恢复了两个要素的真实性并看到了两者之间的必要联系。历史的生活经验与讲述“活着的上帝”生活的宗教故事严格相关，而“活着的上帝”显然不是“系统之神”。神学及其创造悬念，然后将其刻写在历史舞台上的形而上戏剧的叙述方式，揭示了活生生的历史时空与宗教意象之间的深层联系。