Abstract
What is the nature of history remains a question that is open to debate among historians and philosophers of history. It seems, however, that this ongoing debate is mainly focused on the possible ways we can either know or understand or interpret something which already took place. 1 History, then, appears to be orientated either towards knowledge of the past or interpretation of the past in the present. Hence, as I will show in the next paragraphs, history as a future to be responsibly chosen by an ethical subject is totally absent from this debate.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Martin Stuart-Fox, ‘Two views of the history of historiography and the nature of history’, History Australia, 4(2), 2007, pp. 44.1–44.17.
Arthur Marwick, The New Nature of History: Knowledge, Evidence, Language, (Chicago: Lyceum Books Inc., 2001).
Copyright information
© 2014 Georgios Patios
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Patios, G. (2014). Conclusion. In: Kierkegaard on the Philosophy of History. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137383280_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137383280_7
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-48046-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-38328-0
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)