?????? ?????????? Lecture 6 Approach to Comparative-Historical Method (3): Constructionism in Historical Perspective

1
????????????????Lecture 6Approach to
Comparative-Historical Method (3)
Constructionism in Historical Perspective
2
(No Transcript)
3

• Michael Stanfords The Nature of Historical
  Knowledge The Predicament of the Historians

Unseen
Seen
Past events Historical field
Historical evidence
The construction in the historians mind
Historical communication (book, lecture or
article)
The public mind
Historical action (which become part of
historical events)
4
Paul Ricoeurs 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

5
(No Transcript)
6
Paul Ricoeurs Objectivity and Subjectivity in
History

• The incomplete objectivity in historical study..
• 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.
  Historians judgments of importance (in Webers
  words cultural significance) will not only
  affect historians 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  parts in choice of data (i.e. historical
  documents or any other forms of historical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
Paul Ricoeurs Objectivity and Subjectivity in
History

• The incomplete objectivity in historical study
• Conception of causality
• According to Ernest Nagels 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)
• 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
Paul Ricoeurs Objectivity and Subjectivity in
History

• The incomplete objectivity in historical study
• Conception of causality
• Accordingly, there are at least of three tiers of
  causality to be explored in historical studies
  (Ricoeur, 1965, p. 26)
• The geo-political, socio-economic, and cultural
  conditions/ contexts
• The temporal and/or epochal conditions/contexts
• The flow of events.

9
Paul Ricoeurs Objectivity and Subjectivity in
History

• The incomplete objectivity in historical study
• Temporal distance
• 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)
• 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
Paul Ricoeurs Objectivity and Subjectivity in
History

• The incomplete objectivity in historical study
• Human distance
• 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)
• 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
Paul Ricoeurs Objectivity and Subjectivity in
History

• Objectivity in historians subjectivity In view
  of these features of incomplete objectivity in
  historical investigation, historians can guard
  against the trap of absolute relativism or
  subjectivism by
• Objectification and reflection on historians
  subjectivity
• 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

13
(No Transcript)
14
The Nature of Historical Research Debate between
Modernist and Postmodernist
15
The Nature of Historical Research Debate between
Modernist and Postmodernist
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)

17
(No Transcript)
18
Leopold von Ranke and Modern Historicism The
Reconstructionist Project

1. Ranke rejects the philosophy of history laid down
   by philosophers notably Hegel by criticizing
   Hegels 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
Leopold von Ranke and Modern Historicism The
Reconstructionist Project

• 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
Leopold von Ranke and Modern Historicism The
Reconstructionist Project

1. The research strategies leading to the revelation
   of what actually happened, according to Rankes
   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
   factsis undoubtedly the supreme law (ibid) in
   Rankes method of historiography..

21
Leopold von Ranke and Modern Historicism The
Reconstructionist Project

• In general, accordingly to Iggers, the
  scientific orientation of the reconstructionists
  since Leopold von Ranke shared three basic
  assumptions
• They accepted a correspondence theory truth
  holding that history portrays people who really
  existed and actions that really took place.
• 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
Leopold von Ranke and Modern Historicism The
Reconstructionist Project

• shared three basic assumptions
• 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)

23
(No Transcript)
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 historians
   facts. Therefore, the social called historical
   facts are practically inseparable with their
   interpretations.

25
In Search of the Theory of History The
Constructionists Project

1. In Carrs 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
In Search of the Theory of History The
Constructionists Project

• 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 constituents
• A theory of structure An account of the
  fundamental relationship constitutive of a
  particular kind of society
• A theory of transformation An account of the
  mechanism or mechanisms responsible for social
  changes and fundamental transformation of the
  social structure
• A theory of directionality
• Changes (increase/decrease) in some culturally
  significant property
• Teleological or non-teleological change debate
  on predetermined trajectory and outcomes of
  changes

27
Marxist Constructionist Framework of Historical
Research

• The theory of structure Theory of class
  exploitation
• The theory of transformation The historical
  materialism
• Primary thesis on the relation between force of
  production and relation of production
• The thesis between the base/infrastructure and
  superstructure
• The theory of directionality
• The theory of development of force of production
  and class struggle
• Teleological theory of change towards communism,
  i.e. classless society

28
Framework of HistoricMax Weber's Constructionist
al Research

• The theory of structure Theory of domination
• "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

• The theory of structure Theory of domination
• Webers 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
Max Weber's Constructionist Framework of
Historical Research

• The theory of structure Theory of domination
• Webers two bases of domination
• Monopoly of interest in market sphere
• Legitimation and authority in political sphere

31
Max Weber's Constructionist Framework of
Historical Research

• 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.
• The theory of directionality perspective
• Theory of rationalization of the Occident and the
  iron cage of instrumental rationality
• Non-teleological

32
Max Webers Comparative-Historical Method
33
Max Webers Comparative-Historical Method

• The ontological framework of sociocultural
  phenomena
• Essential roles of social carriers in particular
  social fabric and epoch
• Status groups, classes, universal organizations
  (primary associations), e.g. households, clan,
  neighborhood
• External structure (secondary association),
  e.g. the states, sects or churches, enterprises,
  and political parties

34
Max Webers Comparative-Historical Method

• The ontological framework
• The variable intensity of patterned/typical
  action
• (Webers conception of four types of social
  action means-end rational, value-rational,
  affectual, and traditional action)
• Forces of historical events, technology, and
  geography in shaping cultural phenomena and
  changes
• Power of the social carriers and conflict and
  competition among them

35
Technology
Geography
Historical Events
External structure
Social carriers
Typical actions
Intensity
Social carriers
Typical actions
Intensity
Typical actions
Social carriers
36
Max Webers Comparative-Historical Method

• Weber's Conception of Causal Analysis
• Adequate causation of concrete phenomenon vs.
  nomological causation of universal phenomena
• Degree of causality distinction among
  facilitating and necessary orientations of
  actions
• Counterfactual comparison as means to test degree
  of causality of a given set of antecedent
  conditions "favoring" a given effect

37
Max Webers Comparative-Historical Method

• Weber's Conception of Causal Analysis
• 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
• Theoretical framework as ideal type in causal
  mode

38
Technology
Geography
Historical Events
External structure
Social carriers
Typical actions
Intensity
Intensity
Social carriers
Typical actions
Synchronic Interaction
Synchronic Interaction
Intensity
Typical actions
Social carriers
Intensity
Diachronic Interaction
39
Max Webers Comparative-Historical Method

• Max Weber's Conception of Ideal Type as Heuristic
  Instrument in Comparative-Historical Research
• The nature of ideal type
• 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
• Ideal type is value-relevant point of view to
  reality and not an objective and complete
  vantage-point to cultural phenomenon
• Ideal type is dialectic mediator between the
  finite human mind and the infinite reality

40
Max Webers Comparative-Historical Method

• Max Weber's Conception of Ideal Type
• The Usage of Ideal Type
• 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
Max Webers Comparative-Historical Method

• Max Weber's Conception of Ideal Type
• The Usage of Ideal Type .
• 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

42
Technology
Geography
Historical Events

External structure

Social carriers
Typical actions

Intensity

Social carriers
Typical actions
Synchronic Interaction
Synchronic Interaction
Intensity
-
Typical actions
Social carriers

Diachronic Interaction
43
Lecture 6Approach to Comparative-Historical
Method (3) Constructionism in Historical
Perspective
END