(The Impossibility of) Acting upon a Story That We Can Believe

Rethinking History 22 (1):105-125 (2018)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
The historical sensibility of Western modernity is best captured by the phrase “acting upon a story that we can believe.” Whereas the most famous stories of historians facilitated nation-building processes, philosophers of history told the largest possible story to act upon: history itself. When the rise of an overwhelming postwar skepticism about the modern idea of history discredited the entire enterprise, the historical sensibility of “acting upon a story that we can believe” fell apart to its constituents: action, story form, and belief in a feasible future outcome. Its constituent parts are nevertheless still hold, either separately or in paired arrangements. First, believable stories are still told, but without an equally believable future outcome to facilitate. Second, in the shape of what I call the prospect of unprecedented change, there still is a feasible vision of a future (in prospects of technology and the Anthropocene), but it defies story form. And third, it is even possible to upon that feasible future, but such action aims at avoiding worst case scenarios instead of facilitating best outcomes. These are, I believe, features of an emerging postwar historical sensibility that the theory and philosophy of history is yet to understand.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-03-05
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life.Nikolopoulou, Kalliopi; Agamben, Giorgio & Heller-Roazen, Daniel

View all 32 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
179 ( #23,456 of 50,159 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
33 ( #19,098 of 50,159 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.