Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:18:59.238Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - History and the Social Sciences

from PART II - THE DISCIPLINES IN WESTERN EUROPE AND NORTH AMERICA SINCE ABOUT 1880

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2008

By
Jacques Revel
Edited by
Theodore M. Porter  and
Dorothy Ross
Theodore M. Porter
Affiliation:
University of California, Los Angeles
Dorothy Ross
Affiliation:
The Johns Hopkins University
Get access

Summary

History plus the social sciences: This has been a common formula for more than a century. It has produced extensive discussions and an enormous literature, often quite repetitive, seeking to explain what the relationship between history and the social sciences should be, could be, and cannot be. Still, the terms of the debate have not stabilized. At once epistemological and methodological, the debate also involves power struggles among disciplines and the social representations that they nourish and reflect. For this reason, experiences differ from one country to another. This essay will concentrate on three principal experiences, those in Germany, France, and the United States.

THE PROBLEM POSED

Despite some distant precedents, the problem was not attacked directly until the period when the social sciences were recognized as autonomous disciplines and institutionalized in academia. This was the period from the 1870s to the 1880s – the American Gilded Age – For the sciences of politics and economics and to a lesser degree for sociology, and from 1880 to 1900 in France’s Third Republic, where university reforms opened the way for the scientific disciplines of geography, sociology, psychology, and economics. In both America and France, these new sciences embodied the demands for objectivity, method, and positive knowledge, and they expressed the dominant ideologies of progress. The German disciplines provided models for many other countries, but the German social sciences developed in the Humboldtian university within a cultural system built around philosophy, and their ascent appeared threatened at the end of the nineteenth century by the unity of the ideal of Bildung, or cultivation.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge History of Science , pp. 391 - 404
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, Andrew “History and Sociology: The Lost Synthesis,” in Engaging the Past: The Uses of History across the Social Sciences, ed. Monkkonen, E. H. (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
Braudel, Fernand “Histoire et sciences sociales: la longue durée,” Annales ESC, 4 (1958)Google Scholar
Braudel, Fernand reprinted in Ecrits sur l’histoire (Paris: Flammarion, 1972).Google Scholar
Croce, Benedetto “La storia ridotta sotto il concetto generale dell’arte” (1893), in his Primi Saggi (Bari: Laterza, 1918).Google Scholar
Febvre, Lucien “Une question mal posée: les origines de la Réforme française et les causes de la Réforme,” Revue Historique, 161 (1929).Google Scholar
Febvre, LucienCombats pour l’histoire (Paris: Armand Colin, 1953).Google Scholar
Fogel, Robert and Douglass, Douglass, Railroads and Economic Growth (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1964)Google Scholar
Fogel, Robert and Stanley, Stanley, Time on the Cross: The Economics of American Negro Slavery (Boston: Little Brown, 1974).Google Scholar
Higham, JohnHistory: Professional Scholarship in America (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983).Google Scholar
Hofstadter, Richard “History and the Social Sciences,” in Varieties of History, ed., Stern, Fritz (New York: Meridian, 1956)Google Scholar
Iggers, GeorgHistoriography in the Twentieth Century: From Scientific Objectivity to the Postmodern Challenge (Hanover, N.H.: Wesleyan University Press, 1997) chap.5.Google Scholar
Iggers, GeorgThe German Conception of History: The National Tradition of Historical Thought from Herder to the Present (Middletown, Conn.: Wesleyan University Press, 1968).Google Scholar
Kocka, JürgenSozialgeschichte, Begriff-Entwicklung-Probleme, 2nd ed. (Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1986).Google Scholar
Landes, David S. and Tilly, Charles, eds., History and Social Science (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1991).Google Scholar
McDonald, T. J. ed., The Historic Turn in the Human Sciences (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monod, Gabriel “Bulletin historique,” Revue historique, 61 (1896).Google Scholar
Novick, PeterThat Noble Dream: The “Objectivity Question” and the American Historical Profession (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Passeron, Jean-ClaudeLe Raisonnement sociologique: L’espace non-poppérien du raisonnement naturel (Paris: Nathan, 1991).Google Scholar
Potter, David M.People of Plenty: Economic Abundance and the American Character (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1954)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Revel, Jacques “Histoire et sciences sociales. Les paradigmes des Annales,” Annales, Economies, Sociétés, Civilisations, 6 (1979).Google Scholar
Robinson, J. H.The New History: Essays Illustrating the Modern Historical Outlook (New York: Macmillan, 1912).Google Scholar
Ross, DorothyThe Origins of American Social Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991).Google Scholar
Simiand, Francois “Méthode historique et science sociale,” Revue de Synthèse historique, 6 (1903).Google Scholar
Skocpol, Theda ed., Vision and Method in Historical Sociology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoianovich, TrajanFrench Historical Method: The Annales Paradigm (Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1976)Google Scholar
Stuart Hughes, H. “The Historian and the Social Scientist,” American Historical Review, 66 (1960).Google Scholar
Wehler, Hans-ÜrichHistorische Sozialwissenschaft und Geschichtsschreibung (Göttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht, 1980)Google Scholar
Wright Mills, C. in The Sociological Imagination (New York: Oxford University Press, 1959).Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×