Michael Stanford’s The Nature of Historical Knowledge: The Predicament of the Historians

北京师范大学北京师范大学教育研究方法讲座系列教育研究方法讲座系列

Lecture 6Approach to Comparative-Historical Method (3):

Constructionism in Historical Perspective

3

Michael Stanford’s The Nature of Historical Knowledge: The Predicament of the Historians

Past events & Historical field

Historical evidence

The construction in the historian’s mind

Historical communication (book, lecture or article)

The public mind

Historical action (which become part of historical events)

Unseen Seen

4

Paul Ricoeur’s Objectivity and Subjectivity in History

1. The incomplete objectivity in historical study: In comparison with the objectivity attained or claimed to have attained in natural science, Ricoeur underlines that historical objectivity is “an incomplete objectivity” (1965, p.26) Their incompleteness can be featured in four counts

6

1. The incomplete objectivity in historical study:..a. Judgment of importance: Choices made by historian in their

process of investigations are based mainly on judgment of importance rather than empirically and objectively derived criteria, which natural scientists claimed to have used. Historian’s judgments of importance (in Weber’s words ‘cultural significance’) will not only affect historian’s choice of topics and/or problem of investigation, but will play essential parts in choice of data (i.e. historical documents or any other forms of historical artifact), in constructing causal sequences (i.e. narrative), in selecting contextual factors, against which the data and causal explanations are set against.


7

1. The incomplete objectivity in historical study:b. Conception of causality:

① According to Ernest Nagel’s classification explanation can be differentiated into: deductive model, probabilistic explanation, functional explanation and genetic explanation. He characterizes that “historical inquiries frequently undertake to explain why it is that a given subject has certain characteristics, by describing how the subject has evolved out of some earlier one. Such explanations are commonly called ‘genetic’.” (Nagel, 1961, p. 25)

② In this kind of explanations, what historians seek to attain is not determinations but conditions or “fields of influence, opportunities, etc.” (Ricoeur, 1965, p. 27)


8

1. The incomplete objectivity in historical study:b. Conception of causality:

③ Accordingly, there are at least of three tiers of causality to be explored in historical studies (Ricoeur, 1965, p. 26)a) The geo-political, socio-economic, and cultural conditions/ contexts

b) The temporal and/or epochal conditions/contexts

c) The flow of events.


9

1. The incomplete objectivity in historical study:c. Temporal distance:

① In historical investigation, historians encounter one objective difficulty, i.e. to understand their objects of inquiry in remote distance. They basically experience the “phenomenon of self-alienation, of drawing out, of distension, in a word, of original ‘otherness’.” (Ricoeur, 1965, p. 27)

② To overcome this kind of distance and otherness, historians have to project them into “another present” to be exact past. These efforts of projecting into the past, which has been characterized by Riceour as “temporal imagination”, require a kind of “subjectivity, which is never approached by the science of space, matter, and life.” (ibid, p. 28)


10

1. The incomplete objectivity in historical study:d. Human distance

① “ What history ultimately tries to explain and understand are men. The past from which we are removed is human past. In addition to temporal, therefore, there is that specific distance which stems from the fact that the other is different man.” (ibid, p. 28)

② To overcome it, historians are expected to be able to wage a kind of “sympathetic efforts” in their investigation. That is, it “is not merely an imaginative projection into another present but a real projection into another human life.” (ibid, p. 28)


11

2. Objectivity in historian’s subjectivity: In view of these features of incomplete objectivity in historical investigation, historians can guard against the trap of absolute relativism or subjectivism by a. Objectification and reflection on historian’s subjectivity

b. Historical criticism among historians


12

The Nature of Historical Research: Debate between Modernist and Postmodernist

1. Past events & historical field: Can they be fully recovered?

2. Historical evidence: Objective fact, theoretically mediated facts/ interpretation, or socially constructed reality

3. The role of the historical researcher: Objective reconstructionist, theoretically guided constructionist, interpreter of text within text within contextes

4. Research output of historical study: Authentic correspondence of the past, culturally significant representations of the past from selective perspectives, or retrieval of suppressed representations of the past

14

Past events Historical evidences Role of researchers Outputs of historical research

Reconstructionist Fully Retrievable Objective facts Objective and impartial Reconstructionists

History as authentic correspondence of the past

Constructionist Partly retrievable

Structurally and theoretically mediated interpretations

Theoretically and structurally guided constructionist

History as representations of the past from selective perspectives

Deconstructionist Irretrievable Socially constructed and/or systemic distorted representations

Interpreters of text within text within context

History as retrieval of suppressed representations of the past


15

Reconstructionist: Traditional Historigraphy e.g. Leopold von Ranke, Geoffrey Elton, C.B. McCullagh...

Constructionist: Historical Sociology e.g. Karl Marx, Max Weber, Reinhard Bendix, Charles Tilly,

Theda Skocpol, Margaret Somers, ..

Deconstructionist: Narrative, Trop, and Discourse e.g. Hyden White, Michel Foucault, …


16

Leopold von Ranke and Modern Historicism: The Reconstructionist Project

1. From the philosophy of history to the historical science: Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886) has been respected by Western historians as the founding father of modern profession of historical science. He begins his project of building the profession of historical science by first of all criticizing “the pitfalls of a philosophy of history” (Ranke, 1973, Chapter 4)

18


2. Ranke rejects the philosophy of history laid down by philosophers notably Hegel by criticizing Hegel’s “assertion that reason rules the world.” (Ranke, 1973, P. 49) And this reason, which has been characterized by Hegel as “The Spirit”, will set the path in which “mankind is on an uninterrupted road to progress, in a steady development toward perfection.” (Ranke, 1973, P. 29)

19


3. Accordingly, Ranke asserts that the subject of study in history is not the spirit or the universal destiny of human progress. Instead “our subject is mankind as it is, explicable or inexplicable, the life of the individual, of the generations, of the people.” (Ranke, 1973, P. 138)

Furthermore, Ranke also refrains the mission that “to history has been given the function of judging the past, of instructing men for the profit of future years.” Instead he asserts that “the present attempt does not aspire to such lofty undertaking. It merely wants to show how, essentially, things happened.” (Ranke, 1973, P. 137

20


4. The research strategies leading to the revelation of what actually happened, according to Ranke’s recommendations as well as illustrations in his historical research works, is to go directly to the first-handed sources, such as “memoirs, diaries, letters, reports from embassies, and original narratives of eyewitnesses.” (Ranke, 1973, P. 137) Hence, “strict presentation of facts…is undoubtedly the supreme law” (ibid) in Ranke’s method of historiography..

21


5. In general, accordingly to Iggers, “the scientific orientation” of the reconstructionists “since Leopold von Ranke shared three basic assumptions…a. They accepted a correspondence theory truth

holding that history portrays people who really existed and actions that really took place.

b. The presupposed that human actions mirror the intentions of the actors and that it is the task of the historian to comprehend these intentions in order to construct a coherent history story.

22


…shared three basic assumptions……c.They operated with one-dimensional, diachronical conception of time, in which later events follow early ones in a coherent sequence.

The assumptions of the reality, intentionality, and temporal sequence determined the structure of writing …from Ranke well into the twentieth century.” (Iggers, 1995, P. 3) This school in historiography has therefore been characterized as the Reconstructions” by Alun Munslow (1997), while Iggers called the Classical Historicism. (1995)

24

In Search of the Theory of History: The Constructionists’ Project

1. Most of the constructionists in historical researches share the presupposition of mediating the past with a preconceived theoretical framework. As E.H. Carr, one of the key member of the camp, stresses the historical evidences appear before us are already in the form of selectively interpreted facts of the historians. They are what Carr called the “historian’s facts”. Therefore, the social called historical facts are practically inseparable with their interpretations.

25


1. …In Carr’s own words, “the facts of history never come to us ‘pure’ since they do not and cannot exist in a pure form: they are always refracted through the mind of the recorder. It follows that we take up a work of history, our first concern should not be with the fact which it contains but with the historian who wrote it.” (Carr, Quoted in Munslow, 1997, Pp.44-45)

26


2. Alex Callinicos, another constructionist according to Munslow, suggests that one may read the work of historians by tracing their theory of history with the following constituentsa. A theory of structure: An account of the fundamental

relationship constitutive of a particular kind of societyb. A theory of transformation: An account of the mechanism or

mechanisms responsible for social changes and fundamental transformation of the social structure

c. A theory of directionality① Changes (increase/decrease) in some culturally significant property ② Teleological or non-teleological change: debate on predetermined

trajectory and outcomes of changes

27

Marxist Constructionist Framework of Historical Research

1. The theory of structure: Theory of class exploitation 2. The theory of transformation: The historical

materialisma. Primary thesis on the relation between force of production

and relation of productionb. The thesis between the base/infrastructure and

superstructure3. The theory of directionality:

a. The theory of development of force of production and class struggle

b. Teleological theory of change towards communism, i.e. classless society

28

Framework of HistoricMax Weber's Constructionist al Research

1. The theory of structure: Theory of dominationa. "Domination refers to a meaningful

interrelationship between those giving orders and those obeying, to the effect that the expectations toward which action is oriented on both sides can be reckon upon." (1968/78, p. 1378)

29

Max Weber's Constructionist Framework of Historical Research

1. The theory of structure: Theory of domination…b. Weber’s two bases of domination:“(T)here are two diametrically contrasting type of

domination, viz., domination by virtue of constellation of interest (in particular: by virtue of a position of a monopoly), and domination by virtue of authority, i.e. power to command and duty to obey. The purest type of the former is monopolistic domination in the market; of the latter, patriarchal, magisterial, or princely power.” (Weber, 1978, p.942).

30


1. The theory of structure: Theory of domination…b. Weber’s two bases of domination:…

① Monopoly of interest in market sphere② Legitimation and authority in political sphere

31


2. The theory of transformation: The multi-causal framework of social carriers, intensity of actions, conflicts among dominant and assertive groups, forces of historical events, technology and geography.

3. The theory of directionality perspectivea. Theory of rationalization of the Occident and the iron cage

of instrumental rationalityb. Non-teleological

32

Max Weber’s Comparative-Historical Method

33


1. The ontological framework of sociocultural phenomena a. Essential roles of social carriers in particular social fabric

and epoch① Status groups, classes, “universal organizations” (primary

associations), e.g. households, clan, neighborhood② “External structure” (secondary association), e.g. the states, sects or

churches, enterprises, and political parties

34


1. The ontological framework …b. The variable intensity of patterned/typical action(Weber’s conception of four types of social action: means-end

rational, value-rational, affectual, and traditional action)c. Forces of historical events, technology, and geography in

shaping cultural phenomena and changesd. Power of the social carriers and conflict and competition

among them

Social carriers

External structure

Typical actions

Social carriers

Typical actions

Historical Events Technology Geography

Social carriers

Typical actions

Intensity

Intensity

36


2. Weber's Conception of Causal Analysisa. Adequate causation of concrete phenomenon vs.

nomological causation of universal phenomenab. Degree of causality: distinction among facilitating and

necessary orientations of actions c. Counterfactual comparison as means to test degree of

causality of a given set of antecedent conditions "favoring" a given effect

37


2. Weber's Conception of Causal Analysis…d. Synchronic and diachronic interactions in causal model

• Syncricahronic (within the present) interaction among societal domains

• Diachronic (between present and past) interaction in causal mode Distinction between legacy and antecedent conditions Distinction between inter-domain and intra-domain diachronic

interaction• Contextual effects on conjunctural interaction

e. Theoretical framework as ideal type in causal mode

Social carriers

External structure

Typical actions

Social carriers

Typical actions


Social carriers

Typical actionsIntensity

Intensity

Synchronic

InteractionSynchronic

Interaction

Diachronic Interaction Intensity

Intensity

39


3. Max Weber's Conception of Ideal Type as Heuristic Instrument in Comparative-Historical Researcha. The nature of ideal type

① Ideal type is a one-sided accentuation of reality and not a schema which can be completely exhaust the infinite richness of a cultural phenomenon

② Ideal type is value-relevant point of view to reality and not an objective and complete vantage-point to cultural phenomenon

③ Ideal type is dialectic mediator between the finite human mind and the infinite reality

40


3. Max Weber's Conception of Ideal Type …b. The Usage of Ideal Type

① Ideal type is used as yardstick to measure and compare the specificity of cultural phenomenon• Single ideal type, e.g. means-end rational action, bureaucracy, etc.

• Compound ideal type, e.g. patrimonial bureaucracy

41


3. Max Weber's Conception of Ideal Type …b. The Usage of Ideal Type ….

② Ideal type is used as hypothesis-forming model• Ideal type as dynamic model, e.g. bureaucracy, patrimonialism,

rationalized education, etc.• Ideal type as contextual model, e.g. the impact of calculable law on the

rise of capitalism in Western Europe, the contextual effect of “stratification principles on education, etc.

• Ideal type as affinity and antagonism model intra-domain model of antagonistic relationship, e.g. antagonistic

relationship among bases of legitimacy, esp. between legal-rational and charismatic authority

inter-domain antagonistic relationship, e.g. antagonistic relationship between charismatic rulership and rational economy, between traditional religious identity and rational identity with nation-state, etc.

inter-domain affinity, e.g. affinity between calculable law and rational capitalism, between Calvinist doctrine and spirit of capitalism

Social carriers

External structure

Typical actions

Social carriers

Typical actions


Social carriers

Typical actionsIntensity

Intensity

Synchronic

InteractionSynchronic

Interaction

Diachronic Interaction

+

-

±

±

±

±

END

Lecture 6Approach to Comparative-Historical Method (3):

Constructionism in Historical Perspective

Michael Stanford’s The Nature of Historical Knowledge: The Predicament of the Historians

Documents

Transcript of Michael Stanford’s The Nature of Historical Knowledge: The Predicament of the Historians