Talk:Historism

Philosophy: Social and political / Modern Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Social and political philosophy
	Modern philosophy

History C‑class Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Older comments[edit]

First I thought about nominating this page for deletion, since it contained only spam, but now I thought of a better idea, creating a redirect to Historicism. Crix 03:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about not doing that. There is a big difference between the both.

re-ligating?[edit]

Where the article says "re-ligating", does it perhaps mean to say "relegating"? "Re-ligating" makes no sense to me at all. - Jmabel | Talk 23:00, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Second sentence[edit]

It is reasonably clear from the second sentence, beyond which I have no intention of reading, that this is a translation of the German text: 'pronounce' is a possible translation of 'hervorheben', but is unsuitable in this context, 'emphasize' being preferable. Pamour (talk) 11:42, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The latter part of the following quoted sentence is ambiguous if not erroneously formulated, perhaps another form of the word "affection" is intended. "It pronounces the historicity of man, his binding to tradition, and the awareness of humans affection by their past." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.228.97.88 (talk) 10:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]