What do you think?
Rate this book
Analytical Philosophy of History
The crusade which conquered Mediterranean Spain in the thirteenth century resulted in the domination by an alien Christian minority of a dissident Muslim majority and an unusually large Jewish population. Professor Burns' research into previously untapped archival sources reveals the tensions and interaction between the three religious societies after the crusade. A principal source for the author's research has been the revolutionary paper registers of King Jaume the Conqueror. These abundant and neglected documents shed new light on Jaume's pluri-ethnic kingdom during its first generation of settlement. The chapters, each a pioneering work for its topic, are radically different in subject and in approach, and yet concern the same theme, the symbiosis of cultures in the redeveloping kingdom, and the same time-span, the reigns of Jaume the Conqueror and his son, Pere the Great.
- GenresPhilosophyHistory
330 pages
First published January 1, 1968
3 people are currently reading
43 people want to read
About the author
Arthur C. Danto
168 books174 followersArthur C. Danto was Johnsonian Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at Columbia University and art critic for The Nation. He was the author of numerous books, including Unnatural Wonders: Essays from the Gap Between Art and Life, After the End of Art, and Beyond the Brillo Box: The Visual Arts in Post-Historical Perspective.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 1, 2024
THE FAMED PHILOSOPHER OF ART LOOKS AT HISTORY
Arthur Coleman Danto (born 1924) is an American philosopher and art critic (he was a long-time art critic for The Nation). He wrote in the Preface to this 1965 book, "This book is an analysis of historical thought and language, presented as a systematic network of arguments and clarifications, the conclusions of which compose a descriptive metaphysic of historical existence." (Pg. vii)
He begins by stating, "This book is an exercise in analytical philosophy of history." (Pg. 1) He points out, "There are... many gaps in our account of the past. But just suppose that ... that we know everything that ever happened; that we have some Ideal Chronicle of the whole past. This would still not be the whole of history with which I said that substantive philosophers of history are concerned. Such an ideally complete account of the whole past would at best furnish DATA for a substantive philosophy of the whole of history." (Pg. 2)
He observes, "the substantive philosophers of history... are clearly concerned with what I shall term prophecy. A prophecy is not merely a statement about the future, for a prediction is a statement about the future. It is a certain KIND of statement about the future, and I shall say ... that it is an HISTORICAL statement about the future. The prophet is one who speaks about the future in a manner which is appropriate only to the past, or who speaks of the present in the light of a future treated as a fait accompli." (Pg. 9)
He argues, "substantive philosophy of history is a mis-conceived activity... It is a mistake... to suppose that we can write the history of events before the events themselves have happened..." (Pg. 14) He suggests, "substantive philosophy of history ... consists in making projections, which I regard as illegitimate, into the future, of the same sorts of structures, which historians employ in organizing the events of the past... any account of the past is ESSENTIALLY incomplete... my thesis [is] that a complete account of the past would require a complete account of the future." (Pg. 17)
He suggests that even an Ideal Chronicler "capable of seeing all at once everything that happens... is not enough. For there is a class of descriptions of any event under which the event cannot be witnessed . and these descriptions are necessarily and systematically excluded from the [Ideal Chronicler]. The whole truth concerning an event can only be known after, and sometimes only LONG after the event itself has taken place, and this part of the story historians alone can tell." (Pg. 151)
He concludes, "Philosophies of history attempt to capture the future without realizing that if we knew the future, we could control the present, and so falsify statements about the future, and so such discoveries would be useless. We capture the future only when it is too late to do anything about the relevant present, for IT is then past and beyond our control. We can but find out what its significance was, and this is the work of historians: history is made by them." (Pg. 284)
Danto's book is essential reading for anyone studying modern interpretations of the philosophy of history.
Arthur Coleman Danto (born 1924) is an American philosopher and art critic (he was a long-time art critic for The Nation). He wrote in the Preface to this 1965 book, "This book is an analysis of historical thought and language, presented as a systematic network of arguments and clarifications, the conclusions of which compose a descriptive metaphysic of historical existence." (Pg. vii)
He begins by stating, "This book is an exercise in analytical philosophy of history." (Pg. 1) He points out, "There are... many gaps in our account of the past. But just suppose that ... that we know everything that ever happened; that we have some Ideal Chronicle of the whole past. This would still not be the whole of history with which I said that substantive philosophers of history are concerned. Such an ideally complete account of the whole past would at best furnish DATA for a substantive philosophy of the whole of history." (Pg. 2)
He observes, "the substantive philosophers of history... are clearly concerned with what I shall term prophecy. A prophecy is not merely a statement about the future, for a prediction is a statement about the future. It is a certain KIND of statement about the future, and I shall say ... that it is an HISTORICAL statement about the future. The prophet is one who speaks about the future in a manner which is appropriate only to the past, or who speaks of the present in the light of a future treated as a fait accompli." (Pg. 9)
He argues, "substantive philosophy of history is a mis-conceived activity... It is a mistake... to suppose that we can write the history of events before the events themselves have happened..." (Pg. 14) He suggests, "substantive philosophy of history ... consists in making projections, which I regard as illegitimate, into the future, of the same sorts of structures, which historians employ in organizing the events of the past... any account of the past is ESSENTIALLY incomplete... my thesis [is] that a complete account of the past would require a complete account of the future." (Pg. 17)
He suggests that even an Ideal Chronicler "capable of seeing all at once everything that happens... is not enough. For there is a class of descriptions of any event under which the event cannot be witnessed . and these descriptions are necessarily and systematically excluded from the [Ideal Chronicler]. The whole truth concerning an event can only be known after, and sometimes only LONG after the event itself has taken place, and this part of the story historians alone can tell." (Pg. 151)
He concludes, "Philosophies of history attempt to capture the future without realizing that if we knew the future, we could control the present, and so falsify statements about the future, and so such discoveries would be useless. We capture the future only when it is too late to do anything about the relevant present, for IT is then past and beyond our control. We can but find out what its significance was, and this is the work of historians: history is made by them." (Pg. 284)
Danto's book is essential reading for anyone studying modern interpretations of the philosophy of history.
Displaying 1 of 1 review