context relevant for properly interpreting a philosopher’s views?; (3) in what way must philosophers be charitable in their interpretation of a text?; (4) in what way does the history of philosophy differ from intellectual history? Since I am presenting Gadamer’s views against the background of the
encompasses emotional motivations, symbolic assumptions, and social power practices; the introduction of the idea of an existential claim that we encounter when understanding agents and contexts; and the critique of the methodological positions of interpretive objectivism and interpretive presentism which are
focusing on Jesus and history (all of these presentations have been published). Crook seems to be echoing the tendencies toward theoretical ‘presentism’ of Israeli scholar Yael Zerubavel. 13 He seems to be arguing against the ‘continuitism/traditionalism’ of Schwartz. But he does not cite either Zerubavel
“Presentism” is a recurrent dilemma in historical inquiry. On the one hand, concern for the present and its immediate futures is the motivator of a great deal of historical research, and relevance for the present is often both a metric of history’s importance (as assessed by
understood from a contemporary perspective. How does the Journal of Early Modern History handle religion in the face of Eurocentrism and presentism?
Some journals we receive in hard copy, but in the virtual academic world reading typically involves journals pouring their contents into a river called