In the previous posts, I have discussed Lakatosian and counterfactual considerations about the use of frameworks in historiography. I have argued that frameworks generate possible futures and therefore historiography is committed to sets of possible futures, whether historians like it or not. In this post, I argue that choices of explanatory frameworks reflect values and […]
Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is. Part 2. Counterfactuals, Frameworks, Futures
Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is (PYMOWYM) principle: All research on historical phenomena both assumes and makes conclusions about the workings of the relevant phenomena. The commitments limit and shape the possible structures of the phenomena in the future. In the previous post, I discussed Lakatos’s idea of framework-driven historiography. According to Lakatos, historical […]
Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is. Part 1: Lakatosian Considerations
Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is (PYMOWYM) principle: All research on historical phenomena both assumes and makes conclusions about the workings of the relevant phenomena. The commitments limit and shape the possible structures of the phenomena in the future. — How can a historian (or a historiographical community) identify a chunk of actual history […]