This essay critically examines contemporary discussions of pragmatism in history. First of all, as for the ‘practice before knowledge’ argument, I point out that historical inquiry cannot be properly explained by the argument whose validity is grounded in the instinct nature of practice because historical research is a contingent, intellectual behavior. About the ‘self-correcting’ argument, I maintain that historical inquiry cannot be rendered self-correcting by the pragmatic test of truth that is, in nature, future-oriented and consequentialist given that the main goal of history is to produce, not predictions or plans of action, but retrospective beliefs, which makes the mechanism of verification through action inapplicable to history. My view on the ‘disciplinary consensus’ argument is that showing how historical beliefs are produced and confirmed within the discipline does not necessarily amount to an explanation of why we should go through the whole process.

中文翻译：

---

客观还是团结？历史实用主义的当代探讨

本文批判性地考察了当代关于历史实用主义的讨论。首先，对于“先实践后知识”的论点，我指出，历史研究不能用其有效性基于实践的本能性质的论点来正确解释，因为历史研究是一种偶然的、智力的行为。关于“自我纠正”的论点，我坚持认为，鉴于历史的主要目标是产生而不是预测，真理的务实检验不能使历史探究自我纠正，后者本质上是面向未来和结果论的或行动计划，而是追溯性的信念，这使得通过行动进行验证的机制不适用于历史。