Modal History versus Counterfactual History: History as Intention

EasyChair Preprint 5276

Abstract

The distinction of whether real or counterfactual history makes sense only post factum. However, modal history is to be defined only as ones’ intention and thus, ex-ante. Modal history is probable history, and its probability is subjective. One needs phenomenological “epoché” in relation to its reality (respectively, counterfactuality). Thus, modal history describes historical “phenomena” in Husserl’s sense and would need a specific application of phenomenological reduction, which can be called historical reduction. Modal history doubles history just as the recorded history of historiography does it. That doubling is a necessary condition of historical objectivity including one’s subjectivity: whether actors’, ex-ante or historians’, post factum. The objectivity doubled by ones’ subjectivity constitute “hermeneutical circle”.

Keyphrases: Historiography, counterfactual history, hermeneutical circle, historical objectivity, historical phenomenon, historical reduction, historical subjectivity, history as intention, modal history

@booklet{EasyChair:5276,
  author    = {Vasil Penchev},
  title     = {Modal History versus Counterfactual History: History as Intention},
  howpublished = {EasyChair Preprint 5276},
  year      = {EasyChair, 2021}}