京都學派哲學家田邊元（Tanabe Hajime, 1885-1962）及大島康正（ŌshimaYasumasa, 1917-1989）於二次大戰後以各自的歷史哲學立場論述「時代區分的成立根據」，即探討「人類區分歷史或時代的根據為何？」的議題，藉以主張「超克近代」的可能性。本文主要探討兩者在戰後如何反省與面對「近代超克」的問題。本文首先概觀田邊的史觀，並論究田邊以何種立場辯證黑格爾、蘭克與馬克思的歷史哲學，及其時代區分法。接著，析論大島以何種立場詮釋巴比倫人、希臘人、以色列人的史觀以及基督教的超越時代思想，並進一步探討其如何藉由消化文藝復興時期的史觀，來建立自身的時代區分根據。最後，藉由比較田邊與大島的「超克近代」論述，
來思考兩者的時代區分法對現今吾人構築史觀能提供何種哲學思想資源。

After the Second World War the Kyoto School philosophers Tanabe Hajime
(1885-1962) and .shima Yasumasa (1917-1989) offered individual accounts of
periodization principles with their own stances of philosophy of history. Exploring the periodization principles of human history and time, Tanabe and .shima advocated the possibility of "surpassing modernity." The purpose of this essay is to investigate how the two philosophers rethink and confront the issues of "surpassing modernity." First, this essay supplies an overview of Tanabe's notion of history, examining his dialectic positions on critiquing the philosophies of history of Hegel, Ranke, and Marx, and Tanabe's method of periodization. Second, this essay analyzes the ways in which .shima interprets the Babylonians', the Greeks', and the Israelis' views on history, and the Christian thinking that surpasses time. It further investigates how .shima established his own periodization principles by absorbing the Renaissance view on history. Finally, by comparing Tanabe's and .shima's discourses on "surpassing modernity," this essay investigates what kinds of philosophical resources the two different approaches to periodization
can provide for our view on history.