Which past? Whose transcendental presupposition?

Abstract

This paper starts from the presumption that historiography is not the objective retelling of a self-evident object?'the past'?but is rather a 'code', one that constitutes its object. The central element in this code, it suggests, is humanism/anthropology. It is not because man is a meaning producing being, who leaves behind traces of himself, that history-writing is possible; rather, it is historiography that helps secure this humanist/anthropological presumption. Moreover, the presumption that Man is a culture secreting and meaning producing being is not universally 'true', is not (pace Weber) a 'transcendental presupposition', but is rather a specifically modern and presumption. History-writing, the essay concludes, is not always adequate to non-Western pasts

Similar works

This paper was published in Goldsmiths Research Online.

Having an issue?

Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.