This paper focuses on the discipline of history, its methods, subject, and output. A brief overview of contemporary analytic philosophy of history is provided, followed by critical discussion of historical realism. It is argued that the insistence on the idea that historians inquire into the real past and that they refer to the actual past entities, events, or agents is widely open to sceptical objections. The concept of an abstract historical chronicle of past events which are explained or retold by historians is identified as misleading. The idea of historical antirealism is then introduced. It is argued that in the centre of historian's attention are present phenomena that are identified as historical evidence and require historical explanation. Historical explanation consists of constituting an historical pasta fictional model that accounts for present data. The identification process of historical evidence and the discursive nature of historical enterprise are analysed and accompanied by several concrete examples. According to historical antirealism, historians are not interested in the real past, but in the present empirical data. In their pursuit of historical knowledge, they produce fictional models-an historical past. Lastly, several common caveats against historical antirealism are addressed. The historical antirealism is presented as a viable fictionalist account of the historical inquiry that is capable of avoiding 636 David Černín Organon F 26 (4) 2019: 635-659 sceptical attacks on historical method and it is argued that antirealism allows history to retain its worth as a distinctive kind of scientific discipline.

Jaká je role historie v době post-faktické? Může nám filosofie historie pomoci bránit se proti cílenému zneužívání historických narativů na ideologickém základě? Tento článek zkoumá filosofické reflexe historie a jejich vztah k ideologiím. Je ukázáno, že na počátku této filosofické disciplíny filosofové jako Karl Popper nebo C. G. Hempel usilovali o eliminaci politického a ideologického zabarvení historie. Avšak narativistické bádání Haydena Whita naznačuje, že takový cíl je nedosažitelný. Antirealistická filosofie historie, zastoupena L. J. Goldsteinem, dokonce odmítá reálnou minulost jako cíl historického bádání a zdůrazňuje situovanost historiků ve vztahu k důkazům. Představená verze historického antirealismu chápe historii jako současné zkoumání, které sdílí řadu rysů s kritickým myšlením a zaměřuje se především na zkoumání empirických dat, jež vyžadují postulaci nepřístupné minulosti. Tato podobnost by měla být zdůrazněna skrze výuku historie jako zkoumání, nikoliv jako pouhého příběhu.

No abstract

Over the last few years, philosophers and other researchers have been focusing on a post-truth era and its symptoms across society and various disciplines. One of the most glaring manifestations is the declining trust in science experts and the rise of populist attacks on professional communities. Historical sciences are encountering a similar onslaught as well. This paper aims to examine one particular clash between a professional discourse regarding a new archaeological discovery with groundbreaking potential and a populist reaction to it. The study utilises contemporary theory and philosophy of history and its view of historical inquiry to tackle its main goaluncover strategies populists use to vilify experts and professionals. Even though historiography has been abused throughout its existence, it is argued that recent attacks are substantially different and potentially more dangerous.

No abstract