W. E. B. Du Bois once remarked that “It was in Germany that my
first awakening to social reform began” (Aptheker 1982, p. 275). This essay examines the intellectual
impact of Du Bois's voyage to Berlin from 1892 to 1894. His
acquisition of empirical social research methods under the tutelage of
German historical economists, particularly Gustav von Schmoller, armed him
with the intellectual and methodological tools he needed in his effort to
attack pervasive biological determinist theories in the United States.
Using empirical techniques grounded in a “system of ethics” as
his conceptual guideposts, Du Bois analyzed race as not a biological but a
social phenomenon. To be sure, this was no easy task. He was also a
“race man,” who, loyal to his moral commitment to building a
program of racial uplift, sought legitimacy as a social scientist from his
fellow American sociologists, who summarily ignored his work. Struggling
to serve his roles as both scientist and race man, Du Bois functioned
within an intellectual space of double consciousness, constantly
vacillating between two communities and two voices. In the end, Du Bois
would successfully bring the scientific method to the race question, using
inductive methods in his sociological studies on the African American
experience. This approach made possible his seminal work The
Philadelphia Negro (1899) and, subsequently, his research at Atlanta
University. In the final analysis, his empirical research stood its
ground, successfully advancing a new paradigm for examining race based on
the idea that the putative racial hierarchy, theoretically grounded in
biological determinism, was nothing more than a social artifact buttressed
by racism. He further demonstrated how the economic disparity between
Whites and Blacks functioned as the prime catalyst for “a plexus of
social problems” that plagued African American life (Du Bois 1898, p. 14). His conclusions were a radical departure
from the work of many American sociologists, many of whom were sympathetic
to social Darwinism—his most formidable challenge.This essay would not have been conceived without the steady
support and constant pushing of my dear friends and colleagues, all of
whom have read or heard this paper at various stages: Anne Harrington,
Robert Brain, Stephen C. Ferguson, Fanon Che Wilkins, Craig Koslofsky,
Matti Bunzl, Peter Fritzsche, Frederick Hoxie, Dianne Pinderhughes, Jason
E. Glenn, Bernadette Atuahene, Adam Biggs, Charlton Copeland, and Bikila
Ochoa.