O presente artigo discute, de forma sucinta, algumas das principais questões em torno das quais vem se dando o debate acerca do fazer história do pensamento político e social nas últimas três décadas. Importa esclarecer, comparando, limites e possibilidades teóricas e metodológicas das duas vertentes mais produtivas no campo hoje: o contextualismo lingüístico de Quentin Skinner e a história dos conceitos (Begriffsgeschichte) desenvolvida por Reinhart Koselleck. Pretende-se, com isso, organizar minimamente a pauta de questões em discussão e estabelecer pontos interessantes para a pesquisa das relações da teoria política e social com a sua história.

The present article briefly discusses some of the main issues around which there has been debate on the making of the history of social and political thinking for the last three decades. It is important to clarify, by comparison, both the limits and theoretical and methodological possibilities of the two most productive branches in the field today: the linguistic contextualism of Quentin Skinner and the concepts (Begriffsgeschichte) developed by Reinhart Koselleck. We intend, in doing so, to minimally organize the guidelines of matters in discussion and establish interesting points on the relations of social and political theory with its history.

Cet article aborde, de forme succincte, certaines des principales questions à propos du débat sur la formation de l'histoire de la pensée politique et sociale au cours des trois dernières décennies. Il est important d'expliquer, tout en les comparant, les limites et les possibilités théoriques et méthodologiques des deux courants les plus productifs actuellement: le contexte linguistique de Quentin Skinner et l'histoire des concepts (Begriffsgeschichte) développé par Reinhart Koselleck. Nous proposons, ainsi, d'organiser les questions qui sont à l'ordre du jour, ainsi que d'établir les points intéressants pour la recherche des relations de la théorie politique et sociale avec leur histoire.

The article contends that for Tocqueville the notion of Providence was an important tool in dealing with problems he encountered both in explaining the emergence of democratic equality as a universal phenomenon and in defining possible lines of action for those who, like him, advocated a liberal solution to the challenges brought by modernity. Specifically, it is argued that the notion of Providence played three roles in the construction of Tocqueville’s arguments: a rhetorical role (convincing his peers that a return to the Old Regime was unfeasible); a cognitive role (lending meaning to the long-term process without reinforcing materialist views regarding either chance or the causality immanent to history); and an ethical-political role (determining the role of responsible human action within the contemporary world).