The histor(iograph)ical turn of analytic philosophy

Has the proverbially “a(nti)-historical” analytic philosophy taken a “historical turn” as some analytic “insiders” have heralded recently? In this densely argued and extensively referenced book, Blagovest Mollov argues that it has not, mainly because the only relatively determinate meaning the term can be given derives from a dubious and equally vague “historicist” perspective. Outside, and even within, the latter, the author holds, what has come to be discussed as “the historical turn (of analytic philosophy)” is neither historical nor a turn, in the sense other “turns” (supposedly) signal a radical departure from and replacement of preceding philosophical projects and methodology. While conceding that the discussion the “turn” has provoked may nevertheless prove to be methodologically beneficial – especially if it manages to show that and how philosophical historiography has always been motivated and governed by (meta)philosophical concerns - the author expresses skepticism regarding the “turn’’’s purely philosophical uses in the form of the suggested “hybrid” of “doing philosophy historically”.