Abstract
Analysis of the rhetorical genre of conversation explains how it is possible to defend both historical relativism and tolerance at the same time. The object of this analysis is the debate in the early 1990's between philosopher of history Hayden White and historian Roger Chartier. This debate is best read as a conversation, and the use of this rhetorical genre made it possible for White to defend a historical relativist position against the charge that a relativization of historical knowledge makes historical revisionist interpretations of the Holocaust and other traumatic events credible. White's willingness to enter into dialogue with persons who respect the rules of conversation provides a theoretical stance that makes it possible to dismiss revisionist historians while at the same time defending a form of tolerance of the opinions of others. The problem, however, is that this stance only tolerates opinions formulated by persons who share the conventions of a certain community. Although White has been associated with the antihumanistic impulse that has had such influence on contemporary theories within the humanities and social sciences, he has actually defended humanism ever since the early 1960's.
[ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
[ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]