scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
JournalISSN: 1872-261X

Journal of The Philosophy of History 

Brill
About: Journal of The Philosophy of History is an academic journal published by Brill. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Philosophy of history & Ancient philosophy. It has an ISSN identifier of 1872-261X. Over the lifetime, 267 publications have been published receiving 1421 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
A. Zhok1
TL;DR: The notion of social practice and a family of notions akin to it play an essential role in contemporary philosophical reflection, with particular reference to the conceptualisation of historical processes as mentioned in this paper, and Turner's book A Social Theory of Practices (1994) has provided a major challenge to this family.
Abstract: The notion of social practice and a family of notions akin to it play an essential role in contemporary philosophical reflection, with particular reference to the conceptualisation of historical processes. Stephen Turner's book A Social Theory of Practices (1994) has provided a major challenge to this family of notions, and our purpose is to outline a grounding account of the notion of social practice in the form of an answer to Turner's criticisms. We try to answer three questions: first, if it is necessary to grant a tacit dimension to transmittable habits; second, if and how a tacit dimension of "meaning" could be intersubjectively transmitted; third, what is the possible role of rationality in changing social practices. Our discussion moves from Wittgenstein's argument on rule-following; in its wake we try to examine the nature of habits as a basis for rules and discuss their temporal sedimentation, inertia and modes of intersubjective transmission. In conclusion we support the idea that social practices must rely on a tacit dimension, that their tacit dimension does not represent a hindrance to intersubjective transmission, and that the possible dogmatism of social practices is not due to their "hidden" side, but to their explicit quasi-rational side.

195 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a theory of genealogy is proposed, explaining its rise in the nineteenth century, its epistemic commitments, its nature as critique, and its place in the work of Nietzsche and Foucault.
Abstract: This paper offers a theory of genealogy, explaining its rise in the nineteenth century, its epistemic commitments, its nature as critique, and its place in the work of Nietzsche and Foucault. The crux of the theory is recognition of genealogy as an expression of a radical historicism, rejecting both appeals to transcendental truths and principles of unity or progress in history, and embracing nominalism, contingency, and contestability. In this view, genealogies are committed to the truth of radical historicism and, perhaps more provisionally, the truth of their own empirical content. Similarly, genealogies operate as denaturalizing critiques of ideas and practices that hide the contingency of human life behind formal ahistorical or developmental perspectives.

73 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors illustrate the historiographical conceptions of three early analytic philosophers: Frege, Russell and Wittgenstein, and consider some of the debates generated by the recent historical turn in analytic philosophy, looking at the work of Scott Soames and Hans-Johann Glock.
Abstract: This article has three main interconnected aims. First, I illustrate the historiographical conceptions of three early analytic philosophers: Frege, Russell and Wittgenstein. Second, I consider some of the historiographical debates that have been generated by the recent historical turn in analytic philosophy, looking at the work of Scott Soames and Hans-Johann Glock, in particular. Third, I discuss Arthur Danto’s Analytic Philosophy of History, published 50 years ago, and argue for a reinvigorated analytic philosophy of history.

50 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper argued that analytic philosophers are often indifferent or even hostile to the history of philosophy as such, and that such an attitude is actually inconsistent with approaches within the philosophies of mind that are typical within analytic philosophy.
Abstract: Analytic philosophers are often said to be indifferent or even hostile to the history of philosophy – that is, not to the idea of history of philosophy as such, but regarded as a species of the genus philosophy rather than the genus history. Here it is argued that such an attitude is actually inconsistent with approaches within the philosophies of mind that are typical within analytic philosophy. It is suggested that the common “argument rather than pedigree” claim – that is, that claim that philosophical ideas should be evaluated only in the context of the reasons for or against them, and not in terms of historical conditions that brought them about – presupposes an early modern “egological” conception of the mind as normatively autonomous, and that such a view is in contradiction with the deeply held naturalistic predispositions of most contemporary philosophers of mind. Using the example of Wilfrid Sellars, who attempted to combine “naturalist” and “normative” considerations in his philosophy of mind, it is argued that only by treating the mind as having an artifactual dimension can these opposing considerations be accommodated. And, if the mind is at least partly understood as artifactual, then, to that extent, like all artifacts, it is to be understood via a narrative about the particular human activities in which those artifacts are produced and in which they function.

49 citations

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Journal in previous years
YearPapers
202312
202215
20211
202010
201913
20189