Counterfactual Arguments in Historical Analysis: From the Debate on the Partition of Africa and the Effect of Colonial Rule
During the last decade the question of counterfactual arguments has attracted a good deal of attention both in philosophy and history. A recent example, which concentrates on the logics of counterfactual analysis in history, is T.O. Climo and P.G.A. Howells' “Possible worlds in historical explanation.” Further progress in this field probably depends both on a development of the purely logical issues involved and an analysis of the actual usage of counterfactuals in the language of practicing historians. My own approach belongs primarily to the latter category. I shall consider examples of counterfactual arguments in two hotly debated fields, first the partition of the African continent and, second, the effects of colonial rule. This approach will provide examples of the function of counterfactuals both in causal analysis and in historical evaluations. My primary aim is to establish a categorization of different usages, but the opportunity will also be taken to discuss in a general manner criteria for the legitimate use of counterfactual argument in history. In this connection I should emphasize my lack of knowledge in formal logic, except that provided by my two Norwegian collegues, Ottar Dahl, and Jon Elster, on whom I rely heavily for the more theoretical parts of this paper.Historical analysis is preoccupied with causes, and in causal analysis there is a particular urge to identify socalled “sufficient” and “necessary” causes. In propositions about such causes some counterfactual assumptions are logically implicit. The clearest example of a necessary cause or precondition for European expansion in Africa is that of technology. To take an early and typical example, Holland Rose maintained that it was an “essential condition” of colonization that “mechanical appliances should be available for the overcoming of natural obstacles.” The implicit counterfactual is that without technology, never colonization. Counterfactuals of this kind scarcely attract attention precisely because of their obvious legitimacy.