Can We Ascribe to Past Thinkers Concepts They Had No Linguistic Means to Express

Bibliographic Data

ID4495309
AuthorsGad Prudovsky (Hebrew College, corresponding author)
Year1997
Volume36
Issue1
Pages15-31
Publication date1997-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueHistory and Theory (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0018-2656 • E-ISSN: 1468-2303
PublisherWiley (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1111/0018-2656.00002
OpenAlexW2150442541
LanguageEN
Citations received12

This article takes a clear-cut case in which a historian (Alexander Koyré) ascribes to a writer (Galileo) a concept ("inertial mass") which neither the writer nor his contemporaries had the linguistic means to express. On the face of it the case may seem a violation of a basic methodological maxim in historiography: "avoid anachronistic ascriptions!" The aim of the article is to show that Koyré's ascription, and others of its kind, are legitimate; and that the methodological maxim should not be given the strict reading which some writers recommend. More specifically, the conceptual repertoire of historical figures need not be reconstructed solely in terms of the social and linguistic conventions of their time and place

Anachronism · Ascription · Historiography · Maxim · Historical Linguistics and Language Studies

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub