Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism
- Autores
- Tozzi, María Verónica
- Año de publicación
- 2016
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- The second half of the twentieth century has been witness to a blooming of reflections on the status of historical narrative. One of the main achievements of a narrativist philosophy of history (NPH) consists of having reinforced the worth of an autonomous historical knowledge vis à vis standard conceptions of science which made history appear as underdeveloped. Although NPH does not dismiss the importance of documentary evidence, it did not produce an integrative account of both dimensions (the work of writing and the work with evidence), being slave of a number of epistemological dualism. On one hand, NPH seems to remain in the representationalist paradigm in the case of evidence, while, on the other hand, it only admits pragmatic evaluation in the case of narrative discourse. In this paper, I sustain that John Dewey’s and George H. Mead’s reflections on our knowledge of the past offer NPH good reasons to assess the role that literary theory can play in reconstructing historical controversies, without neglecting the importance of empirical research. For instance, Dewey holds that historical writing is a case of the judgments produced in response to problematic research situations. By virtue of this, the meaning of judgments referred to the past (that is, historical narrations) “have a future reference and function,” and thus understanding their meaning involves displaying the consequences that follow from such judgments. Mead, for his part, has argued that by appealing to the independent reality of the past as ground for our beliefs about it, rather than contributing to the rational resolution of our historical problems, we stray towards the search of something which is by definition unattainable. As a consequence, I shall show the urgency of advancing in the development of a narrativist, pragmatistically-informed philosophy of history. My considerations will be illustrated through the analysis of a controversial case about a past event: the main plot of the memorable film The man who shot Liberty Valance, by the equally memorable John Ford.
Fil: Tozzi, María Verónica. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Universidad de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero; Argentina - Materia
-
NARRATIVE
EVIDENCE
QUESTION AND ANSWER LOGIC
LITERARY THEORY - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso abierto
- Condiciones de uso
- https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
- OAI Identificador
- oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/179788
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
CONICETDig_dae290de62ed444929611796efb06ce3 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/179788 |
network_acronym_str |
CONICETDig |
repository_id_str |
3498 |
network_name_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
spelling |
Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativismTozzi, María VerónicaNARRATIVEEVIDENCEQUESTION AND ANSWER LOGICLITERARY THEORYhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6The second half of the twentieth century has been witness to a blooming of reflections on the status of historical narrative. One of the main achievements of a narrativist philosophy of history (NPH) consists of having reinforced the worth of an autonomous historical knowledge vis à vis standard conceptions of science which made history appear as underdeveloped. Although NPH does not dismiss the importance of documentary evidence, it did not produce an integrative account of both dimensions (the work of writing and the work with evidence), being slave of a number of epistemological dualism. On one hand, NPH seems to remain in the representationalist paradigm in the case of evidence, while, on the other hand, it only admits pragmatic evaluation in the case of narrative discourse. In this paper, I sustain that John Dewey’s and George H. Mead’s reflections on our knowledge of the past offer NPH good reasons to assess the role that literary theory can play in reconstructing historical controversies, without neglecting the importance of empirical research. For instance, Dewey holds that historical writing is a case of the judgments produced in response to problematic research situations. By virtue of this, the meaning of judgments referred to the past (that is, historical narrations) “have a future reference and function,” and thus understanding their meaning involves displaying the consequences that follow from such judgments. Mead, for his part, has argued that by appealing to the independent reality of the past as ground for our beliefs about it, rather than contributing to the rational resolution of our historical problems, we stray towards the search of something which is by definition unattainable. As a consequence, I shall show the urgency of advancing in the development of a narrativist, pragmatistically-informed philosophy of history. My considerations will be illustrated through the analysis of a controversial case about a past event: the main plot of the memorable film The man who shot Liberty Valance, by the equally memorable John Ford.Fil: Tozzi, María Verónica. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Universidad de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero; ArgentinaAssociazione Pragma2016-12info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/179788Tozzi, María Verónica; Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism; Associazione Pragma; European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy; 8; 2; 12-2016; 167-1892036-4091CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/641info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.4000/ejpap.641info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T10:05:44Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/179788instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 10:05:44.389CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism |
title |
Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism |
spellingShingle |
Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism Tozzi, María Verónica NARRATIVE EVIDENCE QUESTION AND ANSWER LOGIC LITERARY THEORY |
title_short |
Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism |
title_full |
Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism |
title_fullStr |
Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism |
title_full_unstemmed |
Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism |
title_sort |
Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Tozzi, María Verónica |
author |
Tozzi, María Verónica |
author_facet |
Tozzi, María Verónica |
author_role |
author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
NARRATIVE EVIDENCE QUESTION AND ANSWER LOGIC LITERARY THEORY |
topic |
NARRATIVE EVIDENCE QUESTION AND ANSWER LOGIC LITERARY THEORY |
purl_subject.fl_str_mv |
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3 https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6 |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
The second half of the twentieth century has been witness to a blooming of reflections on the status of historical narrative. One of the main achievements of a narrativist philosophy of history (NPH) consists of having reinforced the worth of an autonomous historical knowledge vis à vis standard conceptions of science which made history appear as underdeveloped. Although NPH does not dismiss the importance of documentary evidence, it did not produce an integrative account of both dimensions (the work of writing and the work with evidence), being slave of a number of epistemological dualism. On one hand, NPH seems to remain in the representationalist paradigm in the case of evidence, while, on the other hand, it only admits pragmatic evaluation in the case of narrative discourse. In this paper, I sustain that John Dewey’s and George H. Mead’s reflections on our knowledge of the past offer NPH good reasons to assess the role that literary theory can play in reconstructing historical controversies, without neglecting the importance of empirical research. For instance, Dewey holds that historical writing is a case of the judgments produced in response to problematic research situations. By virtue of this, the meaning of judgments referred to the past (that is, historical narrations) “have a future reference and function,” and thus understanding their meaning involves displaying the consequences that follow from such judgments. Mead, for his part, has argued that by appealing to the independent reality of the past as ground for our beliefs about it, rather than contributing to the rational resolution of our historical problems, we stray towards the search of something which is by definition unattainable. As a consequence, I shall show the urgency of advancing in the development of a narrativist, pragmatistically-informed philosophy of history. My considerations will be illustrated through the analysis of a controversial case about a past event: the main plot of the memorable film The man who shot Liberty Valance, by the equally memorable John Ford. Fil: Tozzi, María Verónica. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Universidad de Buenos Aires; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Tres de Febrero; Argentina |
description |
The second half of the twentieth century has been witness to a blooming of reflections on the status of historical narrative. One of the main achievements of a narrativist philosophy of history (NPH) consists of having reinforced the worth of an autonomous historical knowledge vis à vis standard conceptions of science which made history appear as underdeveloped. Although NPH does not dismiss the importance of documentary evidence, it did not produce an integrative account of both dimensions (the work of writing and the work with evidence), being slave of a number of epistemological dualism. On one hand, NPH seems to remain in the representationalist paradigm in the case of evidence, while, on the other hand, it only admits pragmatic evaluation in the case of narrative discourse. In this paper, I sustain that John Dewey’s and George H. Mead’s reflections on our knowledge of the past offer NPH good reasons to assess the role that literary theory can play in reconstructing historical controversies, without neglecting the importance of empirical research. For instance, Dewey holds that historical writing is a case of the judgments produced in response to problematic research situations. By virtue of this, the meaning of judgments referred to the past (that is, historical narrations) “have a future reference and function,” and thus understanding their meaning involves displaying the consequences that follow from such judgments. Mead, for his part, has argued that by appealing to the independent reality of the past as ground for our beliefs about it, rather than contributing to the rational resolution of our historical problems, we stray towards the search of something which is by definition unattainable. As a consequence, I shall show the urgency of advancing in the development of a narrativist, pragmatistically-informed philosophy of history. My considerations will be illustrated through the analysis of a controversial case about a past event: the main plot of the memorable film The man who shot Liberty Valance, by the equally memorable John Ford. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-12 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/179788 Tozzi, María Verónica; Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism; Associazione Pragma; European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy; 8; 2; 12-2016; 167-189 2036-4091 CONICET Digital CONICET |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11336/179788 |
identifier_str_mv |
Tozzi, María Verónica; Dewey, Mead, John Ford, and the writing of history: pragmatist contributions to narrativism; Associazione Pragma; European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy; 8; 2; 12-2016; 167-189 2036-4091 CONICET Digital CONICET |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/641 info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.4000/ejpap.641 |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/ar/ |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associazione Pragma |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Associazione Pragma |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET) instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
reponame_str |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
collection |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) |
instname_str |
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar |
_version_ |
1844613897053536256 |
score |
13.070432 |