Text
E-book Debating the War in Ukraine : Counterfactual Histories and Future Possibilities
In history, there are both periods of relative stability and critical nodal points, when specific turns of events and choices have an impact on which path the next phase of history will take (for the concept of nodal point, see Bhaskar 1986, 217 and Patomäki 2006, 9–18; for world-historical examples of counterfactual turning points, see Tetlock et al. 2006). A relevant question is: what exactly are the historical moments and situations where acting differently would have been a real possibility and could have had a major impact? Identification of key moments and crit-ical junctures is not only an epistemological question but also concerns the logic of our questions (moreover, this kind of explanation involves considerations of ethical, political, and legal responsibility – aspects e return to later). The logic of questions concerns contrast spaces. Seemingly, the same question can have different meanings depending on the contrast spaces we imagine (see van Fraassen 1980; Garfinkel 1981; Morgan & Patomäki 2017). Finally, it must be stressed that the way we pose questions is related to pragmatics and our positioning in social relations. For example, if a person dies in a car crash, a police officer, a doctor, an engineer, and a traffic planner can all offer explanations for the outcome. All of these have different contrast spaces in their mind (e.g. Has there been a vio-lation of traffic laws and, if so, how?; What was the physiological cause of death?). Explanations can be compiled, and this is something a good social scientist must always try to accomplish; and yet there are many pragmatic interests, contrast spaces, and values behind any such com-pilation. This is definitely true also for counterfactuals concerning the current war in Ukraine.
Tidak tersedia versi lain