The Poverty of Anti-realism

Philosophy of history is currently dominated by postmodernist anti-realists who claim that historiography can never provide true accounts of the past. The Poverty of Anti-realism exposes the faulty premises and reasoning behind such assertions and shows that anti-realism has political implications unforeseen and unwanted by its adherents.

---

Due to the influence of postmodernism, historical anti-realism has come to exercise a massive influence in contemporary philosophy of history. Edited by Tor Egil Førland and Branko Mitrović, The Povery of Anti-realism: Critical Perspectives on Postmodernist Philosophy of History presents perspectives that oppose anti-realist understanding of historians' work. The first part of the book gives an overview of contemporary anti-realist philosophy of history and shows that its claims are either so wide-ranging that they apply to all scientific knowledge, or pertain only to a select part of historians’ work. In the second part, the authors criticize major anti-realist tenets. These include: the assertion that the colligatory concepts historians use are without reference in the past; the idea that historical facts are theory-dependent and therefore unable to upend prevailing theories; Paul Roth’s application of Nelson Goodman’s “irrealist” theory of worldmaking to suggest a plurality of pasts; and the belief that multiple describability prevents historians from providing true and testable accounts of the past. The third and final part shows that the political implications of anti-realism are often other than left-leaning anti-realists think. Their reactions when confronted with the consequences of their theories indicate the inconsistency and untenability of postmodernist philosophy of history.