David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of the Social Sciences 32 (1):3-24 (2002)
This article seeks to answer the following questions: is Quentin Skinner right to claim that actions in the past should not be described by means of concepts not available at the time those actions occurred? And is Ian Hacking right to claim that such descriptions do not merely describe but actually change the past? The author begins by arguing that it is not clear precisely what Skinner is claiming and shows how, under the pressure of criticism, his methodological strictures collapse into trivialities. The author then argues that, although Hacking has given us no reason to accept his claim, we can make sense of it by appealing to the idea of a "Cambridge change." The author concludes by suggesting that as long as we are exercising the right kind of concepts, a suitably modified version of Hacking 's conclusion can be retained. Key Words: action history changes in the past Quentin Skinner Ian Hacking.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Dorothea Debus (2007). Being Emotional About the Past: On the Nature and Role of Past-Directed Emotions. Noûs 41 (4):758-779.
María Laura Martínez (2009). Ian Hacking's Proposal for the Distinction Between Natural and Social Sciences. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 39 (2):212-234.
Anthony Burns (2011). Conceptual History and the Philosophy of the Later Wittgenstein: A Critique of Quentin Skinners Contextualist Method. Journal of the Philosophy of History 5 (1):54-83.
Patrick Sherry (1998). Redeeming the Past. Religious Studies 34 (2):165-175.
N. Tosh (2003). Anachronism and Retrospective Explanation: In Defence of a Present-Centred History of Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 34 (3):647-659.
Peter B. M. Vranas (2005). Do Cry Over Spilt Milk: Possibly You Can Change the Past. The Monist 88 (3):370 - 387.
Ian Hacking (1995). Rewriting the Soul: Multiple Personality and the Sciences of Memory. Princeton University Press.
Matthew H. Kramer (2001). On the Unavoidability of Actions: Quentin Skinner, Thomas Hobbes, and the Modern Doctrine of Negative Liberty. Inquiry 44 (3):315 – 330.
Martin Gustafsson (2011). Seeing the Facts and Saying What You Like: Retroactive Redescription and Indeterminacy in the Past. Journal of the Philosophy of History 4 (3-4):296-327.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads23 ( #107,014 of 1,696,514 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #247,412 of 1,696,514 )
How can I increase my downloads?