The Concept of the Plurality of Times as an Epistemological Vector in Relation to Interpretations of the Past and the Present

In the article, we undertook an analysis of the prospects described in the research literature in connection with overcoming the linear interpretations of time and the transition to the concept of multiple times. We argue that it is possible to link two relatively autonomous objects on the basis of which they are discussed: the sphere of historical knowledge and the theme of memory. We argue that, overcome at the level of theories of the historical process, the linear idea of time is preserved at the level of the creation of national histories and finds its expression in ethnocentrism or methodological individualism. Overcoming ethnocentrism should be associated not so much with the search for a more balanced attitude to specific interpretations of the historical past, associated with the inclusion of injustice shown in relation to other peoples in their own national histories, but with the development of alternative concepts of time that constitute the very formats of writing stories. We believe that the prospects for overcoming linear interpretations of time are associated with the development of the theory of multiple times. We argue that the constructivist approach should be considered the most heuristic theoretical and methodological basis for its implementation. We believe that modern interpretations of the heterogeneity of time imply the recognition of the mobility of time boundaries between the past, present, and future. We put forward the thesis that the criterion for distinguishing the modes of time should be considered the difference in the formats of the organization of knowledge. Correspondingly, we offer an interpretation of the historical past in the format of historical experience. As one of the consequences of this thesis, we affirm the need to revise ideas about the forms of influence of the past on the present. We argue that the recognition of the theory of the heterogeneity of time gives rise to relativism in determining the significance of different time streams in different social groups and cultures. We believe that the recognition of the theory of the diversity of temporal flows for different social and cultural groups presupposes the implementation of a procedure for synchronizing the data of temporal flows, which, on the one hand, makes it possible to overcome relativism, and, on the other hand, allochronism. Furthermore, we emphasize that synchronization should be based on the concept of modernity, which in turn is built on the basis of the project of the future and thus allows for the selection of various ideas about time. 

1. Ankersmit F. R. (2003) Narrative Logic. A Semantic Analysis of the Historian’s Language, M.: Idea-Press, 2003 — in Russ.

2. Assmann А (2016) New Discontent with Memorial Culture, M.: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie. — in Russ.

3. Bevernage B. (2016) Allochronism, equality in time and modernity. Criticism of Johannes Fabian’s radical Modernity project and arguments in favor of the new politics of time. Sociology of Power, 28 (2) : 174-202. — in Russ.

4. Bevernage B. (2021) “The Past of the Past”: Some reflections on the politics of historicization and the crisis of the historicist past. Logos. Philosophical and Literary Journal, 31(4): 65-94. — in Russ.

5. Wimmer A., Glick Schiller N. (2021) Methodological nationalism and beyond: nation-state building, migration and the social sciences. Sociology of Power, 33 (2): 184-231. — in Russ.

6. Hegel G. (1993) Lectures on the Philosophy of History, St. Petersburg: Nauka. — in Russ.

7. Golovashina O. V. (2019) From Intersubjectivity to Interobjectivity: Social Ontology of Time, M. Aquilon. — in Russ.

8. Lorenz Ch. (2021) Out of time? Critical reflections on the presentism of Francois Hartog. Logos. Philosophical and Literary Journal, 31(4):31-64. — in Russ.

9. Oleinikov A. (2021) The time of history. Logos. Philosophical and Literary Journal, 31(4): 5-30. — in Russ.

10. Ulanovsky A. M. (2009) Constructivism, Radical Constructivism, Social Constructionism: The World as Interpretation. Questions of Psychology, 2: 35-45. — in Russ.

11. Ankersmit F. R. (2004) In Praise of Subjectivity. The Ethics of History. D. Carr, Th. R. Flynn, R. A. Makkreel (eds), Evanston, Il.: Northwestern University Press: 3-26.

12. Almeder R. (1992) Blind Realism. An Essay on Human Knowledge and Natural Science. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

13. Berger St. (2012) Writing the Past in the Present: An Anglo-Saxon Perspective. Diogenes 58(1–2): 5–19.

14. Bevernage B., Lorenz С. (2013) Breaking up Time. Negotiating the Borders between Present, Past and Future. History of Historiography, 63 (1): 31-50.

15. Bevernage B. (2018) Narrating Pasts for Peace? A Critical Analysis of Some Recent Initiatives of Historical Reconciliation through ‘Historical Dialogue’ and ‘Shared History’. St. Helgesson, J. Svenungsson (eds) Ethos of History. Time and Responsibility, N. Y.:Berghahn Books: 71–93.

16. Bevir M. (1994) Objectivity in History. History and Theory, 33 (3): 328-344.

17. Bevir M. (2015) Historicism and Critique. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 45(2): 227245.

18. Bresco I. (2008) Giving National Form to the Content of the Past. A Study of the Narrative Construction of Historical Events. Psychology & Society, 1 (1): 1-14.

19. Bilewicz M., Witkowska M., Stefaniak A., Imhoff R. (2017) The lay historian explains intergroup behavior: Examining the role of identification and cognitive structuring in ethnocentric historical attributions. Memory Studies, 10 (3): 310–332.

20. Carretero M., Kriger M. (2011) Historical representations and conflicts about indigenous people as national identities. Culture & Psychology, 2: 177–195.

21. Etinson A. (2018) Some Myths about Ethnocentrism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 96:2, 209-224.

22. Jamal A. (2016) Conflict Theory, Temporality, and Transformative Temporariness: Lessons from Israel and Palestine. Constellations, 23 (3): 365–377.

23. Khoury N. (2020) Postnational memory: Narrating the Holocaust and the Nakba. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 46 (1): 91-110.

24. Kleinberg E., Scott J. W., Wilder G. Theses on Theory and History. (http:// theoryrevolt.com)

25. Lorenz Ch., Tamm M. (2014) Who knows where the time goes? Rethinking History: The Journal of Theory and Practice, 18(4): 499-521.

26. Levy D. (2010) Changing Temporalities and the Internationalization of Memory Cultures. Y. Gutman, A. D. Brown, A. Sodaro (eds) Memory and the Future: Transnational Politics, Ethics and Society, Palgrave Macmillan: 15–30.

27. Megill A. (2007) Historical Knowledge, Historical Error: а Contemporary Guide to Practice, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

28. Mink L. O. (1987) Historical Understanding, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1987.

29. Pihlainen K. (2013) Rereading narrative constructivism. Rethinking History: The Journal of Theory and Practice, 17:4: 509-527.

30. Rockmore, T. (2005) On Constructivist Epistemology, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

31. Rorty R. (1989) Contingency, Irony and Solidarity, Cambridge.

32. Rüsen J. (2004) How to Overcome Ethnocentrism: Approaches to a Culture of Recognition by History in the Twenty-First Century. History and Theory, 43(4), 118-129.

33. Rüsen J. (2007) How to make sense of the past — salient issues of Metahistory. The Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa, 3 (1): 169-221.

34. Rüsen J. (2014) Tradition: A Principle of Historical Sense-Generation and Its Logic and Effect in Historical Culture. History and Theory, 51 (4): 45-59.

35. Simon, Z. B. (2019) The Transformation of Historical Time: Processual and Evental Temporalities. М. Tamm, L. Olivier (eds) Rethinking Historical Time: New Approaches to Presentism, London: Bloomsbury Publishing: 71-84.

36. Tamm M. (2013) Beyond history and memory: new perspectives in memory studies. History Compass, 11(6 ): 458–473.

37. Tamm M. (2018). Introduction: A Framework for Debating New Approaches to History. M. Tamm, P. Burke (eds) Debating New Approaches to History, London: Bloomsbury Publishing: 1-21.

38. Tamm M., Olivier L. (2019) Introduction. Rethinking Historical Time. M. Tamm, L. Olivier (eds) Rethinking Historical Time. New Approaches to Presentism, London: Bloomsbury Academic: 1–20.