In conclusion, let me note that we will often use the term “historiology” rather than “historiography” or “history.” This is because the latter two terms have been used with such varied implications by so many authors that today there is considerable confusion surrounding their meanings. We will use “historiology” in the sense in which Ortega y Gasset (1) coined it, and the word “history” (lowercase) to refer to historical fact and not the science in question.

(1) “This word—historiology—is used here I believe for the first time.…” And further on: “Unacceptable in current historiography and philology is the disparity between the precision employed to get or to handle data, and the imprecision—even more, the intellectual poverty—in the use of constructive ideas.

“Against this state of affairs in the realm of History, there raises up historiology. It is moved by the conviction that History, like empirical science, above all has to be construction and not a ‘gluey mass’—to use the words that Hegel hurls again and again at the historians of his time. The case that the historians could have against Hegel, by opposing [the idea] that the body of history should be constructed directly by philosophy, does not justify the tendency, even more marked in that century, of being content with a sticking together of data. With a hundredth part of what for some time has already been gathered and polished, it was enough to work out some kind of scientific conduct much more authentic and substantial than so much, in effect, that History books offer us.” Translated in Theory of History in Ortega y Gasset: The Dawn of Historical Reason, J. T. Graham (Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 1997, Appendix, “Hegel and Historiology”). Originally published as La Filosofía de la Historia de Hegel y la Historiología, J. Ortega y Gasset, Revista de Occidente (February 1928). Reprinted in Kant, Hegel, Scheler (Madrid: Alianza, 1982, pp. 61 and 72).

 In: Historiological Discussions, Silo

Introduction to Historiological Discussions

Various authors (Dromel, Lorenz, Petersen, Wechssler, Pinder, Drerup, Mannheim, and so on) have addressed the theme of the generations, but it is Ortega y Gasset who must be recognized for having established in his theory of generations the key to understanding the intrinsic movement of the historical process. (31) 

(31) How it is possible that such a conception has passed almost unnoticed by the world of historiology? This is one of the great mysteries, or better still tragedies. Its explanation can be found in the prepredicates of the epoch, which exercise such enormous influence in the cultural environment. In the period of German, French, and Anglo-Saxon ideological supremacy, the works of Ortega y Gasset were associated with a Spain that, in contrast to today, was marching against the flow of the historical process. Making matters worse was the limited and biased exegesis of his prolific output made by some of his commentators. From another angle, he paid dearly for his efforts to translate the important themes of philosophy into an accessible, almost journalistic language, something that proved unforgivable to the mandarins of academic pedantry of recent decades.

32 See “Psychology of the Image” in Contributions to Thought, Silo. Originally published as “Psicología de la Imagen” in Contribuciones al Pensamiento (Buenos Aires: Planeta, 1991).

In: Historiological Discussions, Silo

Chapter 3: History and Temporality, 3.2 Horizon and Temporal Landscape

José Ortega y Gasset (1883 - 1955)

Topics

Life as a radical reality: Ortega regards life as the original reality and the starting point for all philosophical considerations. He introduces the concept ‘I am me and my circumstance’ and emphasises the importance of context for human existence.

Vital reason and historical reason: He develops the concept of ‘raciovitalism’, which seeks to integrate reason and life. Ortega proposes to overcome both pure rationalism and extreme vitalism by arguing that reason should be in the service of life and take into account the historical context.

Criticism of idealism: Ortega distances himself from the Cartesian and phenomenological ‘pure ego’ and proposes a new way of understanding reality that does not limit itself to pure abstraction.

Perspectivism: claims that each individual has a unique perspective on reality and that truth arises from the integration of multiple perspectives.

Commitment to circumstances: Ortega applies his philosophy to the specific problems of his time and regards Spain and Europe as philosophical problems to be solved.

Social and political analysis: In works such as ‘The Revolt of the Masses’, Ortega reflects on modern society, culture and politics, and analyses the crises of his time.

Major works

• Meditations on Don Quixote (1914): One of his first important works, in which he begins to develop his philosophical ideas.

• Spain in Revolt (1921): A historical and sociological analysis of Spain.

• The Problem of our Time (1923): A work in which he sets out his philosophy of vital reason.

• The Revolt of the Masses (1930): Possibly his most well-known work, in which he analyses modern society and the phenomenon of the ‘mass man’.

• Ideas and Beliefs (1940): Essay examining the relationship between thought and reality.

• History as System (1935/1941): A work that develops his concept of historical reason.

Influence

• Spanish and Ibero-American philosophy:

Ortega y Gasset is considered one of the most important 20th-century philosophers in the Hispanic world. His focus on ‘vital reason’ and ‘perspectivism’ has influenced generations of thinkers and built a bridge between European and Latin American philosophy. His work was fundamental to the formation of contemporary thought in Latin America and is studied and discussed at various universities.

• Social and political criticism:

In works such as The Revolt of the Masses, Ortega analysed the transformation of modern society and the emergence of the ‘mass man’, sparking a debate on democracy and culture in the context of the 20th century. His criticism of the lack of intellectual and cultural engagement in society has resonated in later political contexts and is relevant to discussions about the role of the individual in contemporary society.

• Literary style and accessibility:

Ortega's literary style has allowed his ideas to reach a wider audience. His ability to combine philosophy and literature has made his works accessible not only to academics but also to a wide readership, and has contributed to the popularisation of philosophical thought in Spanish culture.

• Cultural dissemination:

Through his magazine Revista de Occidente, Ortega promoted contemporary thought and the translation of German and French philosophical works, helping to overcome Spain's intellectual isolation. This editorial work was crucial for the introduction of new ideas and philosophical currents in the Spanish-speaking world.

• Influence on existentialism:

Ortega is considered a pioneer of existentialism and influenced thinkers such as Jean-Paul Sartre. His idea that a person is constructed by their choices and circumstances has resonated with existentialist philosophy and contributed to a broader dialogue on freedom and individual responsibility.

• Educational legacy:

Ortega's influence is also felt in education, where his philosophical concepts have been incorporated into the curricula of various institutions. His emphasis on the importance of life as a radical reality has inspired pedagogical approaches that value experience and context in learning.