ABSTRACT
This chapter examines Hayden White’s use of Michael Oakeshott’s distinction between the historical and the practical past. The chapter provides a philosophical elaboration and critique of both Oakeshott’s distinction and White’s use of it. Oakeshott’s distinction is expounded as an integral part of his idealist philosophy. The chapter contends that in order to properly understand the distinction, one must first understand Oakeshott’s theories about different modes of understanding to which different kinds of past belong. Besides comparing White and Oakeshott, the chapter develops a critique of the distinction between history and practice. The main claim of the chapter is that there are important internal connections between history and practice that Oakeshott’s distinction neglects. In conclusion, the chapter argues that the ethical and existential dimension of history can only be appreciated by dissolving Oakeshott’s absolute distinction between the practical and the historical past.
