"Historical consciousness" as the objective foundation of the humanities

Dilthey has sought to turn Kant's "critique of pure reason" into a "critique of historical reason" in the humanities, in order to provide both an independent position for the humanities and a new meaning of objectivity in this field. Gadamer rebuked him with his critiques, claiming that Dilthey had fallen into the trap of scientific objectivity and had unconsciously followed the tradition of Neokantism, which was prevalent in his day; despite his historical thinking, Dilthey has not been faithful to all the tools and results of this thinking in his system of thought. In this article, we show how the foundation of the living world and the dilthey hermeneutic method are laid out in "history". The relation between "history", "erlebnis" and, ultimately, "hermeneutics" is the relation between "appearance and interior", which due to man's infinity, his relation to history and historical self-consciousness have found such a distinction, "history" is the "erlebnis" in unarticulated position and "erlebnis" is the same as "history" in the field of openness; "Hermeneutics" is also the logic of this relation and knowledge that has changed this appearance and interior from the position of "conciseness and presence" to the position of "detail and achievement"; Of course, in the light of such a view, what guarantees the objectivity and objective position of the (human) sciences is neither man, nor the erlebnis, nor history.