We defend a realist account of history: past facts are discoveries not creations. We show how
‘moderate’ realists, who admit the critical role of perspective, while insisting on history’s
metaphysical independence from historians, can accommodate Paul Roth’s arguments in favor of
irrealism. Moreover, our position is consistent with ...
We defend a realist account of history: past facts are discoveries not creations. We show how
‘moderate’ realists, who admit the critical role of perspective, while insisting on history’s
metaphysical independence from historians, can accommodate Paul Roth’s arguments in favor of
irrealism. Moreover, our position is consistent with a dynamic past: as history unfurls past events
gain new properties. Realism is necessary, we argue, to capture substantive disputes within history.
It also grounds history’s reflexivity: the point of the continual re-examination of history (and
history’s history!) turns in part on there being mind-independent past facts to be had.