[H-verkko] Oulu, The Role of the Philosophy of History -konferenssi

agricola at utu.fi agricola at utu.fi
Pe Elo 25 08:53:27 EEST 2017

Agricolan tapahtumakalenteriin on lähetetty uusi ilmoitus:

The Role of the Philosophy of History -konferenssi

5.10.2017 klo 09:00 – 7.10.2017 klo 14:00

Host: Centre for Philosophical Studies of History

Keynote speakers:

Frank Ankersmit (Groningen)

Giuseppina D'Oro (Keele)

Jonathan Gorman (Belfast)

Allan Megill (Virginia)

Marek Tamm (Tallinn)

Aviezer Tucker (Harvard)

Conference program and more information can be found at:



What is the role of the philosophy of history in current academia and more
widely in contemporary culture? What is the philosophy of history? And the
philosophy of historiography? The conference The Role of Philosophy of History
is devoted to these questions.

One answer is simply that the philosophy of history does not have much of a role
in current academia, having lost it since the heyday of analytic philosophy of
history. However, interest in the theoretical and philosophical studies of
history has increased in recent years, as evidenced by the INTH conferences in
the recent past, for example. Perhaps now could be the time for the field to
regain its place in academia and culture. If so, what should be the role of the
philosophy of history?

The short history of this discipline covers transitions from the analytic
philosophy of history to studying the narrative aspects of history writing in
the 1970s and 1980s, and more recently the turn towards investigating the role
of memory and the ethical aspects of history writing.  But does the upward
trend of the theory of history contribute to the philosophy of history? And if
so, in what way(s) exactly? Some might naturally question this distinction

The increase of research activity relevant to the philosophy of history has in
any case not been reflected in institutional structures. The old traditional
departmental profiles and subject distinctions in philosophy have proved
enduring. This reason only adds to the urgency to consider the role and nature
of the philosophy of history and historiography. Should the philosophy of
history emulate analytic philosophy of history? Would this pave the way for
greater institutional respectability? Or should it attempt to formulate its own
idiosyncratic philosophical approach and risk becoming even more estranged from
the mainstream? What would be the main questions and problems of it? Should the
philosophy of history be characterized by a certain style or treatment rather
than by a specific substance?

The theory and philosophy of history is in a privileged position in that it has
a close relationship with its object discipline, historiography. Many who write
about theoretical and philosophical aspects of history are historians by
education or at least know historiography well. Both the research and writing of
history are also more accessible for philosophers than many other disciplines of
science. But how intimate should the link between the philosophy of
historiography and historiography be? Is it conceivable that the theoretical and
philosophical studies of history could be practiced more or less autonomously
without much regard to historiography and its actual practice, as some have

It may also be argued that the philosophy of history and historiography are, and
perhaps should be, uniquely placed with regard to the moral problems of
contemporary society. Historiography deals with issues that are significant for
the practical life of people in that it formulates conceptions of the past,
laying blame and responsibility for some actors and proposing moral meaning for
some events. How great a role should these kinds of moral concerns be given in
philosophical studies?

Tiedustelut: Ilkka Lähteenmäki (ilkka.o.lahteenmaki at oulu.fi)
Tämä ilmoitus on luettavissa Agricola-verkossa osoitteessa

Lisätietoja postituslistasta H-verkko