I’m not convinced that the following “Are these not both merely facets of continuing processes, so that the same body of theory should apply equally well looking forward as backwards?” is self-evidently the case. Process-talk, in my view, is something of an historiographical red herring: It tends to make the past sound less chaotic and more organized than it was experienced by historical actors. This is not to say that we shouldn’t engage in process-talk.
H-History-and-Theory is sponsored by the journal, History and Theory, with the objective of increasing and broadening communication among its readers and those interested in the topics discussed in its pages: critical philosophy of history; speculative philosophy of history; historiography; history of historiography; historical methodology; critical theory; time and culture; related disciplines.
In a similar vein, I am attempting to better understand the relationship between history and future studies. Are these not both merely facets of continuing processes, so that the same body of theory should apply equally well looking forward as backwards?
The Eighteenth International Conference, “New Political Science,” and a special philosophy colloquium, will be held at the Hotel Nacional de Cuba and the University of Havana from November 17 to November 20, 2015.