History and Theory最新文献_第3页

THE OPENING OF HISTORICAL FUTURES* 开启历史的未来*

IF 1.1 2区历史学

History and Theory Pub Date : 2024-06-19 DOI: 10.1111/hith.12352

Zoltán Boldizsár Simon, Marek Tamm

引用次数: 0

LANGUAGE—HISTORY—PRESENCE 语言-历史-存在

IF 1.1 2区历史学

History and Theory Pub Date : 2024-06-17 DOI: 10.1111/hith.12351

LUIGI ALONZI

{"title":"LANGUAGE—HISTORY—PRESENCE","authors":"LUIGI ALONZI","doi":"10.1111/hith.12351","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/hith.12351","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 This article deals with the use of language in historiography and with this usage's implications for the conception of history and the historiographical operation/practice. Whereas theorists of “presence” believe that “presence” and “reality” can be grasped in spoken language and written texts, thus generally considering them as a medium that enables access to a “reality” that lies beyond texts and language, I argue that language and texts should themselves be considered as a “reality.” We need to distinguish the process of “presentification” performed by words from the presence of language as a lexical and physical reality; though the two aspects are strictly connected, the presence of language needs to be emphasized as a lexical-semantic system and as a thing in the world. In this article, I consider language as a “living witness” of the narrated events; it is a presence in the moment that events occurred and a presence that is still present. We should think of language as we think of the material world around us—that is, as a transformed landscape that contains present and absent pasts. Historians of “presence” consider the meanings associated with language as a major obstacle obstructing the understanding of history in a new unmediated way; to some extent, this article is an attempt to hold meaning and presence together.\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47473,"journal":{"name":"History and Theory","volume":"63 3","pages":"366-383"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142170260","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

NARRATIVITY, EXPERIENCE, AND MEANING1 叙事性、经验与意义1

IF 1.1 2区历史学

History and Theory Pub Date : 2024-06-13 DOI: 10.1111/hith.12355

Ovidiu Stanciu

{"title":"NARRATIVITY, EXPERIENCE, AND MEANING1","authors":"Ovidiu Stanciu","doi":"10.1111/hith.12355","DOIUrl":"10.1111/hith.12355","url":null,"abstract":"This review essay aims to reconstruct the main tenets of the “narrative constructivist” position defended by Kalle Pihlainen in his book titled Historia fallida and to lay out some of the ambiguities this position generates. I begin by exposing the core commitments underwriting this theoretical project and insist upon the centrality of the distinction between constructivism and constructionism and upon the arguments he advances against the contemporary approaches in the theory of history that advocate the idea of an experience or a presence of the past. Then, I outline the criticism he levels against the understanding of historians’ work as a “conversation with the past” and highlight that, on Pihlainen's account, a responsible historical enterprise must necessarily assume the unavailability of the past and, hence, the ontological distinction between the present and the past. In the final part of the essay, I formulate three interrogations with regard to the overall orientation of this project. First, drawing on Reinhart Koselleck's concept of a “historical nonsynchronicity,” I question the possibility of establishing a clear-cut separation between the past and the present and show that the present is never a homogenous field, for it entails different levels of temporality and a plurality of conflicting registers of meaning. Then, I challenge the description of the past as “a closed domain with no room for interaction.” Finally, I point out that the gap Pihlainen introduces between historical narratives and existential narratives cannot be maintained insofar as the historian's practice must be anthropologically grounded—that is, it must be understood as drawing on a narrative capacity (narrativeness) that belongs to the human life-form.","PeriodicalId":47473,"journal":{"name":"History and Theory","volume":"63 3","pages":"452-460"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hith.12355","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141346044","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

INVENTING THE ALPHABET: THE TECHNOLOGIES OF KNOWLEDGE PRODUCTION 发明字母表：知识生产技术

IF 1.1 2区历史学

History and Theory Pub Date : 2024-06-13 DOI: 10.1111/hith.12356

JOHANNA DRUCKER

引用次数: 0

IF YOU COULD READ MY MIND: ON THE HISTORY OF MIND AND OTHER MATTERS 如果你能读懂我的心关于心灵史和其他问题

IF 1.1 2区历史学

History and Theory Pub Date : 2024-06-11 DOI: 10.1111/hith.12357

Chris Lorenz

{"title":"IF YOU COULD READ MY MIND: ON THE HISTORY OF MIND AND OTHER MATTERS","authors":"Chris Lorenz","doi":"10.1111/hith.12357","DOIUrl":"10.1111/hith.12357","url":null,"abstract":"In The Primacy of Method in Historical Research: Philosophy of History and the Perspective of Meaning, Jonas Ahlskog presents a critical and lucid engagement with contemporary philosophies of history and makes a sustained case for a return to the ideas of history and social science as developed by R. G. Collingwood and Peter Winch. What philosophy needs again is, first, a recognition of the “primacy of method”—that is, the insight that what one knows about reality depends on how one knows it. Second, philosophers need to take “the duality of method” seriously again and to recognize that the modes of explanation in the human sciences and the natural sciences are categorically different from each other—especially now that this difference has been blurred in recent debates about the Anthropocene. Ahlskog's book is thus also a contribution to the classical debate about causal explanation versus meaningful understanding. On closer analysis, however, Ahlskog's “untimely meditations” on “historical method” suffer from an insufficient engagement with counterarguments. A first line of critique challenges the idea that human action cannot be explained causally. A second line of critique challenges the idea that all aspects of human action can be “understood,” because the unintended aspects and consequences of individual actions cannot. These require causal explanation. A third line of critique concerns Ahlskog's denial of the fundamental plurality of ideas of history and the social sciences. Squeezing this plurality into one philosophical mold comes at a price. Unintentionally, Ahlskog's “untimely meditations” also show that much.","PeriodicalId":47473,"journal":{"name":"History and Theory","volume":"63 3","pages":"432-443"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hith.12357","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141359654","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

VALIDATING HISTORICAL INTERPRETATIONS: AN APPROACH FROM CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY 验证历史解释：文化人类学的方法

IF 1.1 2区历史学

History and Theory Pub Date : 2024-06-09 DOI: 10.1111/hith.12354

LAWRENCE ROSEN

{"title":"VALIDATING HISTORICAL INTERPRETATIONS: AN APPROACH FROM CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY","authors":"LAWRENCE ROSEN","doi":"10.1111/hith.12354","DOIUrl":"10.1111/hith.12354","url":null,"abstract":"Historians and anthropologists share a common problem of setting criteria for the validation of their interpretations. While many features are shared and explicit—for example, that a full range of data needs to be considered and that information should be reliably sourced—the actual criteria for assessing supportable interpretations are frequently left unexamined. Following consideration of schemes that have been put forth for validating interpretation in literature, this article considers the criteria applied to the history of an Indonesian town and those employed when scholars have revisited the site of a predecessor's research. Because no interpretation is without some theoretical backdrop, this article considers a particular theory of culture that may facilitate the refinement of standards. The criteria that are then suggested—conjuncture, scope, intersection, comparability, and self-accounting—may help to pinpoint not uniquely correct interpretations but better or worse ones. To test these criteria, this article briefly analyzes two case studies of both historical and anthropological concern: one relates to the history and organization of tribal-based polities and the other concerns the dispute over the circumstances surrounding the death of Captain James Cook. The article concludes that reinvigorating a conversation about such criteria can reinforce the shared interests of historians and anthropologists that have proven so fruitful to recent scholarship.","PeriodicalId":47473,"journal":{"name":"History and Theory","volume":"63 3","pages":"384-402"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2024-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hith.12354","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141367163","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

THE UNCERTAIN STUFF OF HISTORY: OUTLINE OF A THEORY OF INTENTIONALITY—THING BY THING 历史的不确定性：意向性理论大纲--一件事一件事地说

IF 1.1 2区历史学

History and Theory Pub Date : 2024-04-25 DOI: 10.1111/hith.12341

LISA REGAZZONI

{"title":"THE UNCERTAIN STUFF OF HISTORY: OUTLINE OF A THEORY OF INTENTIONALITY—THING BY THING","authors":"LISA REGAZZONI","doi":"10.1111/hith.12341","DOIUrl":"10.1111/hith.12341","url":null,"abstract":"This article addresses the issue of historical knowledge in relation to material evidence. More specifically, it asks, What objects capture the historian's attention and what knowledge is gained from those objects? What does the historian's gaze select as “things of history” and thus as removed from a world of object assemblages and fluid matter? Is it the case that only artifacts deliberately produced or modified by humans (regardless of the purpose) count as “things of history”? Or do physical entities produced by unintended human and nonhuman factors also display temporal endurance or alteration occurring over time and resonate with humans? Are “things of history” only entities endowed with shape, or do formless materials qualify too? In this article, I outline a theory of intentionality in relation to material items for two main reasons. First, it allows for a “critique of material evidence,” which is still missing in the historical discipline. Second, it enables us to address any remaining epistemological, ethical, or political issues, biases, or contradictions associated with the multifaceted research on material culture that affect the way we do history.","PeriodicalId":47473,"journal":{"name":"History and Theory","volume":"63 2","pages":"186-218"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2024-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hith.12341","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140657087","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

TRUE NORTH* 真北*

IF 1.1 2区历史学

History and Theory Pub Date : 2024-04-16 DOI: 10.1111/hith.12344

Ethan Kleinberg

{"title":"TRUE NORTH*","authors":"Ethan Kleinberg","doi":"10.1111/hith.12344","DOIUrl":"10.1111/hith.12344","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 In this article, I suggest that our current relation to the sociopolitical future is one where we are blocked from changing our view of what that future is or could be. In this sense, we are trapped in a time loop wherein the challenges before us are continuously met with social and political solutions designed for futures past, old futures. These past possible futures are ones that failed to solve the problems they were offered to address. As such, there is no growth, change, or redemption that could activate a new future; there is only the rehearsal of the old ones: failed futures from the past. What's more, this process of defuturing also relies on a winnowing of the past such that only those pasts that align with our present are allowed to be brought forward. I argue that, to reactivate our future, we also need to reactivate our pasts. I am thinking of those pasts that we do not seek or do not want but that nevertheless come to us. These are the multiple and competing pasts that swirl with present and future as in a vortex, denying any one past the privilege of guiding, directing, or foreclosing the future. It is only by facing this vortex and reopening the past that we can re-open the future and escape the time loop of our ever-receding horizon.\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":47473,"journal":{"name":"History and Theory","volume":"63 2","pages":"151-165"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140695704","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

ERRATUM TO “GREEN BOUGHS ON THE GRAVES: UNMOORING HERAT FROM IMPERIAL TIME” 勘误："坟墓上的绿色枝桠：从帝国时代开始为赫拉特解除武装"

IF 1.1 2区历史学

History and Theory Pub Date : 2024-04-11 DOI: 10.1111/hith.12345

引用次数: 0

QUESTIONS IN HISTORIOGRAPHY FROM THE NINETEENTH CENTURY TO THE AGE OF GENERATIVE AI 从十九世纪到智能生成时代的历史学问题

IF 1.1 2区历史学

History and Theory Pub Date : 2024-03-19 DOI: 10.1111/hith.12338

Marnie Hughes-Warrington

{"title":"QUESTIONS IN HISTORIOGRAPHY FROM THE NINETEENTH CENTURY TO THE AGE OF GENERATIVE AI","authors":"Marnie Hughes-Warrington","doi":"10.1111/hith.12338","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/hith.12338","url":null,"abstract":"History theory does not have a mature theory of questions. This reflects both historical and philosophical assumptions. As Holly Case has argued in The Age of Questions (2018), the big questions of the nineteenth century and their proposed final solutions arguably primed the murderous logic of genocide in the first half of the twentieth century. On her account, questions have become tamed as technical tools in historical monographs and reviews like this one. This picture of the twentieth century, though, runs up against R. G. Collingwood's historiographical logic of questions and the rise of erotetic logics in computer science. Computational erotetic logics have shaped the creation of large language models such as the GPT series and focused our attention on expressivity, effectivity, and classification in the relation of questions and answers. Collingwood's logic is different, using the relation of questions to questions to point to presuppositions. This metaphysical view of erotetic logic is timely, for it reminds why it might be so hard for historians to cut through with true propositions in an age of AI. Collingwood reminds us that a focus on truth-evaluable answers to questions does not explain why those questions were asked in the first place. Chasing chains of questions back to presuppositions, Collingwood argues that tackling what is assumed and what is lived with can help historians to change an unthinking world. In our age, this includes the idea of a shift from historians being the users of large language models to historians being the designers of new forms of relationship between people and information.","PeriodicalId":47473,"journal":{"name":"History and Theory","volume":"63 2","pages":"259-271"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hith.12338","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141164931","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0