Northcott, Robert (2026) What did Danto show? In: UNSPECIFIED.

Text Danto 11.docx Download (54kB)

Abstract

Arthur Danto famously identified what he claimed was a “differentiating feature of historical knowledge”: that in some cases, what past events explain can never be known at the time they occur but rather only much later. This case for historical exceptionalism remains extremely influential. But I think wrongly so. I argue that Danto does not establish any significant epistemological difference between historical and other sciences, nor between Danto cases and other cases. Nor is any special theory of explanation required for his cases. In seeing why not, we understand more clearly the significance of metaphysical indeterminacy and conceptual plurality.

---

Export/Citation:

EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL

Social Networking:

Share |

---

Item Type:	Conference or Workshop Item (UNSPECIFIED)
Creators:	Creators Email ORCID Northcott, Robert r.northcott@bbk.ac.uk
Keywords:	Danto, history, explanation, indeterminacy, conceptual pluralism, scientific realism, explanatory trickiness
Subjects:	General Issues > Explanation Specific Sciences > Historical Sciences General Issues > History of Philosophy of Science General Issues > Realism/Anti-realism
Depositing User:	Professor Robert Northcott
Date Deposited:	02 Jun 2026 18:34
Last Modified:	02 Jun 2026 18:34
Item ID:	29862
Subjects:	General Issues > Explanation Specific Sciences > Historical Sciences General Issues > History of Philosophy of Science General Issues > Realism/Anti-realism
Date:	1 June 2026
URI:	https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/29862

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Actions (login required)

View Item