State of the Field: Histories of the Future

IF 0.6 3区 历史学 Q1 HISTORY
History Pub Date : 2024-02-14 DOI:10.1111/1468-229X.13389
Jeroen Puttevils, Max-Quentin Bischoff, Sara Budts, Elisabeth Heijmans, Sanne Hermans, Nicolò Zennaro
{"title":"State of the Field: Histories of the Future","authors":"Jeroen Puttevils,&nbsp;Max-Quentin Bischoff,&nbsp;Sara Budts,&nbsp;Elisabeth Heijmans,&nbsp;Sanne Hermans,&nbsp;Nicolò Zennaro","doi":"10.1111/1468-229X.13389","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In the last decade, future thinking has rapidly gained importance as a topic of historical study. This article provides an overview of the existing historiographies of future thinking as well as the actions and practices that follow such thoughts. We trace the pedigree of histories of the future back to the German historian of ideas Reinhart Koselleck and show how his conceptual framework has been adopted and adapted by later scholars. We highlight the sources and methods that are typically used. A particularly fruitful approach that emerges from our meta study revolves around the concept of pluritemporality – the coexistence of different layers of time. The article also seeks to uncover some weaknesses and biases that are still present in the field. The most urgent issue being probably the lack of consensus on a conceptual apparatus; other blind spots concern the relationship between future thinking and its linguistic expression in historical sources, the question of whose future thinking we are talking about, how future thinking relates to human action in the past, and how short-term futures interact with their long-term futures equivalents. Overall, however, the aim of this survey is to emphasise the potential of this burgeoning field for future historical research. Much is to be gained from new theories of historical time which are themselves the consequence of ideas about climate change and the dangers of the Anthropocene, human extinction and trans- and post-humanism and about artificial intelligence and the digital world.</p>","PeriodicalId":13162,"journal":{"name":"History","volume":"109 384-385","pages":"150-172"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-229X.13389","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-229X.13389","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the last decade, future thinking has rapidly gained importance as a topic of historical study. This article provides an overview of the existing historiographies of future thinking as well as the actions and practices that follow such thoughts. We trace the pedigree of histories of the future back to the German historian of ideas Reinhart Koselleck and show how his conceptual framework has been adopted and adapted by later scholars. We highlight the sources and methods that are typically used. A particularly fruitful approach that emerges from our meta study revolves around the concept of pluritemporality – the coexistence of different layers of time. The article also seeks to uncover some weaknesses and biases that are still present in the field. The most urgent issue being probably the lack of consensus on a conceptual apparatus; other blind spots concern the relationship between future thinking and its linguistic expression in historical sources, the question of whose future thinking we are talking about, how future thinking relates to human action in the past, and how short-term futures interact with their long-term futures equivalents. Overall, however, the aim of this survey is to emphasise the potential of this burgeoning field for future historical research. Much is to be gained from new theories of historical time which are themselves the consequence of ideas about climate change and the dangers of the Anthropocene, human extinction and trans- and post-humanism and about artificial intelligence and the digital world.

领域现状:未来的历史
近十年来,未来思维作为一个历史研究课题,其重要性迅速提升。本文概述了现有的未来思想史学以及追随这些思想的行动和实践。我们将未来史的源头追溯到德国思想史学者莱因哈特-科塞勒克(Reinhart Koselleck),并展示他的概念框架是如何被后来的学者所采纳和改编的。我们重点介绍了通常使用的资料来源和方法。在我们的元研究中,围绕多时空概念--不同时间层次的共存--出现了一种特别富有成果的方法。文章还试图揭示该领域仍然存在的一些弱点和偏见。最紧迫的问题可能是在概念工具上缺乏共识;其他盲点涉及未来思维与其在历史资料中的语言表达之间的关系、我们在谈论谁的未来思维的问题、未来思维与人类过去的行动之间的关系,以及短期未来与其长期未来之间的互动关系。不过,总的来说,本次调查的目的是强调这一新兴领域对未来历史研究的潜力。新的历史时间理论本身就是气候变化、人类世的危险、人类灭绝、跨人类主义和后人类主义以及人工智能和数字世界等观念的结果,我们可以从这些新的历史时间理论中获益良多。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
History
History HISTORY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: First published in 1912, History has been a leader in its field ever since. It is unique in its range and variety, packing its pages with stimulating articles and extensive book reviews. History balances its broad chronological coverage with a wide geographical spread of articles featuring contributions from social, political, cultural, economic and ecclesiastical historians. History seeks to publish articles on broad, challenging themes, which not only display sound scholarship which is embedded within current historiographical debates, but push those debates forward. History encourages submissions which are also attractively and clearly written. Reviews: An integral part of each issue is the review section giving critical analysis of the latest scholarship across an extensive chronological and geographical range.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信