ResumoAs questões da (in)tolerância entre as religiões e da liberdade de crença e de pensamento não são novas para a história, ou melhor, não são exclusivas desta época. Basta lembrar, para os propósitos aqui arrolados, uma obra do período iluminista, o Tratado sobre a tolerância de Voltaire, que tratava precisamente disto. Em contrapartida, mesmo vivendo numa era de consolidação de fenômenos de secularização, como Gianni Vattimo entende ser a nossa – e que tem a ver com liberdade, celebração e respeito às diferenças –, ainda se vislumbra a intolerância para com diferentes crenças religiosas, e o não respeito, especialmente por parte de setores de religiões majoritárias como o cristianismo, ao princípio de laicidade do Estado. Em diálogo com o pensiero debole (pensamento fraco) de Vattimo, analisarei a proposta deste autor de migração da ideia de tolerância para a de caridade, como meio de mover-se para além de uma relação metafísica com a verdade nas religiões para a noção pouco comum às práticas e discursos religiosos de uma verdade kenótica, isto é, esvaziada de pretensões de correspondência e, por conseguinte, de imposição sobre outras.
Historical experience is one of the most important topics of Frank Ankersmit's work. As we shall see in this article, 'historical experience' in the Ankersmitean sense is a rare and complex kind of experience, entirely different from the experiences we have in our daily lives, because it presupposes that a historian can be in direct contact with a past that is long gone. But can we really experience the past? How could a historian perform this? As Ankersmit has admitted, this impractical and unusual choice of experience as one of his theoretical guides is controversial, to say the least, especially among scholars strongly oriented by the linguistic turn, narrativism, postmodernism, and so on, because he claims that experience should have priority over language. In this article, the aim is to investigate some of the effects or the aftermaths of what I term 'the dawn of experience' in current theory and philosophy of history. The aim is also to question whether this dawn of experience necessarily means banishing language or representation. In my view, it does not, and experience presupposes a suspension of language, not a complete abandonment of it.
In this interview, Jonathan Menezes asks Frank Ankersmit about various aspects of his theory of historical experience, focusing especially on his main book on the subject, Sublime Historical Experience (2005), but also on other writings in which he accounted for historical experience, like History and Tropology (1994) and Meaning, Truth and Reference in Historical Representation (2012). The subjects addressed in the conversation include some of the existent criticism and polemic about this ‘experiential’ part of Ankersmit’s work; a new analysis of the relationship between Huizinga’s ‘historical sensation’ and Ankersmit’s ‘historical experience’; Ankersmit’s criticism of and attempt to go beyond Rorty and the so-called ‘linguistic transcendentalism’; and Ankersmit’s point of view on the connection between historical experience and the German historicist tradition.
For some contemporary historical theorists, the postmodernist movement in history and its nearly unilateral orientation towards language or discourse recently became subject to ‘the law of diminishing returns’ due to shifts in interests of philosophers and theorists of history at this time. Nevertheless, the contributions left by postmodernism in Western historical thought are too noticeable to be denied, even by those who have criticized it in the past. Frank Ankersmit is one of the few theorists that has been on both sides; firstly, he swiftly tied his case to postmodernism, and secondly, he joined those who, then and now, think that postmodernism was nothing more than an irresponsible and irretrievable trend. Hence, the aim of this paper is to explore some of the particularities of Ankersmit’s affair with postmodernism, taking his metaphor of ‘the autumn of historiography’ as an example of the limits of this relationship and its eventual end.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.