Anthropological Sense of History

Abstract

Purpose. The paper’s main purpose is to establish the nature of the historical past’s reality and its presence in being. Theoretical basis. The author considers historical time as a factor in the identities of individuals and society. The past has a dual ontological status: it is absent as a presence in the literal sense, yet it is embedded in the structure of modernity and influences the future. To substantiate and elucidate the impact of this position on historical cognition, the author employs the methodologies of R. Descartes, E. Husserl, M. Heidegger, F. Ankersmit, and other thinkers. Originality. The author has developed a fluid-discrete model of historical time, linking it with the experiences gained by both individuals and society. This historical experience serves as the anthropological foundation of the subject’s identity and a guide for reconstructing the past. Conclusions. As a historical category, time is only partially connected with time as a subject of discussion in physics and philosophy. All three of these disciplines regard cause-and-effect relationships as fundamental characteristics of time; however, physics and philosophy study them in general terms, while historical science is concerned with their specific implementations. But history also encompasses experience – both that of the participants in the historical process and that of historians or readers of historical texts. This experience becomes one of the reasons behind their actions, as well as the lens through which past events are interpreted. Experience, in both senses, can be false and distorted, raising questions of interpretation; yet, even in such cases, it impacts future actions and thus serves as their cause. Even more importantly, historical experience provides a means of identity. An individual’s own experience allows for self-awareness (I am I), while historical experience facilitates identification with society. Although there is no direct connection to the past, it has not disappeared; it cannot inherently vanish. It does not exist because it has evaporated, nor because it lingers in some unreachable dimension, but due to its transformation into modernity. These transformations can be either fluid or discrete, making historical time fluid-discrete at both individual and social levels. Essentially, the terms "past", "present", and "future" merely serve as distinctions between "now", "not yet", and "too late". In both individual and collective histories, even a minor event can trigger significant resonance, leading to fundamental changes in the future ("butterfly effect"). While it is certainly impossible to ascertain which past events shaped the present, this does not preclude us from constructing a "hierarchy of butterflies" for historical investigation. Thus, reconstructing the historical past becomes a means of self-knowledge, forming its primary anthropological significance.