Adam Tooze

Journal of the Philosophy of History, 2015


This response argues that though one may share Boldizzoni’s critique of conventional economics, he mischaracterizes many of those he criticizes. The pejorative label of “pseudohistory” that he applies to others, is self-defeating. As a description it might be applied to many of the more interesting facets of his own work. What cannot be conceded is the position of the innocent and detached observer he claims for the historian.

View the paper hereContra Boldizzoni: Bringing “Pseudohistory” Back In