Abstract

In the last years, both philosophers of history and historians have been concerned about the epistemological status of historical stories. The debate traces back to Hayden White, who rejected the idea that historical stories can e told from fictional ones on the basis of the real character of the facts referred to. In what follows, I will critically examine White´s conception and I will show that the rejection of the thesis in question depends on three assumptions. The first one is a narrow characterization of the explanatory effect of the historical story conceived as a pictorial representation. Secondly, there is a narrow conception of historical reality, wich allows for a continuity between the analytic philosophy of history and the imposicionalist narrativism. In third place, there is a reduction of the content of the historical text ─namely, the past─ to its form of expression. The upshot is a hypostatization of the litterary aspects of the historical story, with the consequent detriment to its ontological and evaluative commitments