Should We Correct Historiography on the Basis of What Happened Later?

In the journal Futures and Foresight Science 2(3-4) there have been interesting discussions about the relationship between historiography and futures research. The following passage from Martin Kunc’s “A modeler’s perspective: A commentary on Schoemaker 2020” was especially interesting: “Schoemaker states, ‘The word forecasting captures this very notion, suggesting that the momentum of the past casts itself forward, […]

Historical Counterfactuals Unconditionalized

It has been argued many times in the literature concerning historical counterfactuals that “When implementing a counterfactual antecedent, the historian thus asks what conditions would have to be present in order for the antecedent to follow from these conditions, and whether these conditions were likely.” (Reiss 2009, 719). I have discussed this issue in detail […]

Classics in Historiography of Science: Robert K. Merton

In this post, I will continue my discussion about central figures in the history of historiography of science. I discuss Robert K. Merton’s views on science and, following the approach in the previous classics post, I analyze those views from the perspective of current conceptions of and interests towards science. It will be interesting to […]

Deep Historiography, Valid Futures?

In this post, I argue that the criteria of external validity in the futures research and the criteria for explanatory depth in historiography share important conceptual similarities. The similarities suggest many interesting connections between historiographical insights and futures research. — According to Kuusi, Cuhls and Steinmüller (2015), we can explicate the notion of external validity […]