Abstract
Author's note.-The following essay was written in blissful ignorance of Hayden White's essay, Historical Pluralism, which appears in this issue of Inquiry. Had I read White's of my earlier article, Critical Inquiry and the Ideology of Pluralism, I would have undoubtedly written different sort of piece, taking his objections into account. In lieu of that dfferent essay, I'd like to offer three prefatory remarks: (1) White is right to chide me for treating a sense of history as univocal and unproblematic concept; it would have been more consistent with the spirit of my essay to pluralize the notion of history; (2) I think White is wrong to read me as blaming the polarization of criticism exclusively on the pan-textualist vanguard; actually, I spread the blame around pretty evenly, including the positivist rearguard in the indictment; (3) my earlier essay was not, as White seems to suggest, an unqualified celebration of the virtues of pluralism; it was, like White's own piece in this issue, deeply ambivalent about the critical and ideological features of pluralism. I thought of it as half cheer for pluralism, as the following pages should make clear.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
