Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Philosophical analysis reveals that circumstantial traces can enhance historical reconstructions, suggesting new inference pathways.
Existing characterizations of ‘trace’ in the philosophy of the historical sciences agree that traces need to be downstream of the long-past event under investigation. I argue that this misses an important type of trace used in historical reconstructions. Existing characterizations of traces focus on what I propose to call direct traces. What I call circumstantial traces (i) share a common cause with a past event and (ii) allow an inference to said event via an intermediate step. I illustrate the significance of checking the alignment between direct and circumstantial traces in historical reconstructions through a case study from (micro-)palaeontology.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Franziska Reinhard (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: