General laws and predictions

?
View mindmap
  • How have historical thinkers tried making general laws and future predictions
    • MARX
      • transhistorical laws of historical development e.g. in his 'Preface: A Contribution to the Critques of Political Economy', he outlines historical development and his prediction for the future
        • ancient Greece and Rome = master and slave, feudal enclosure and subsistence = serf and lord (but ends bcos enclosure so must become wage labourers), capitalism - wage laboruers and industrialisation (revolution) -> socialism
          • stadial model of European history. sees historical materialism as the most important thing - superstructure base model - unclear where women fit into this?! more a manifesto than history bcos an end point?!
        • Economic factors and development in the base influence the superstructure, but the superstructure, in turn, can also affect the base.
        • its a very deterministic model - leaves little room for human agency
          • EP Thompson leaves more room for human agency - highlights the importance of politics and consciousness - active participants able to shape destiny (Anna Green pg 33)
      • Anna Green: he outlines three historical epochs, each with a more advanced mode of production - 35, he ancitipated that the proletariat would overthrow the system of capitalism - economic relations at the heart of his historical practice - 36
      • Guha disagrees that there are prepolitical societies - looks at documentation of Indian peasant uprisings against the British colonial authorities - shows consciousness in their actions - 4
        • marx sees his model as relevant outside Europe bcos capitalism developing across the world - force for evil destroying traditional and indigenous practices, but also necessary in order to bring about revolution
          • EXCLUSIVE - Joan W Scott: story about men and class - not all actors are male -
    • PHILOSOPHY VS HISTORY
      • a key difference between hsitory and philosophy is that philosophy aims to establish general laws and norms, but hsitory recognises that people don't always act rationally - need to focus on specific contexts (Alun Munslow pg 75-76). historical explanation not scientific bcos multiple meanings, means differentiated from natsci (natural sciences) - 77
        • historians draw parralels between the ast and modern day to infer potential causes and effects but recoggnises can be oversimplifying by imposing contemporary contexts - Alun Munslow - 69
    • A departure from this and an attempt to history on its own unique terms
      • particularly with more individualist postmodern historiographical mindsets and techniques = more focussed on understanding individual cases and marginalised peoples - recognising disadvantageous to establish general laws bcos diversity etc
        • gender as a category of analysis (JW Scott) - what about other inequalities too - how societies approach gender through meaning and language - gender identification v unstable (not fixed) - 1065, make room for human agency
      • Saidiya Hartman and critical fabulation
        • not the purpose of hsitory at all - "to save the girl ... from oblivion", chap 'The Dead Book' - addressing gaps in the historical record
    • ARGUEMNT: no longer seen as defining, or favourable, feature of history. seen as more akin to philosophy, now want to understand history on an individual level - recognising that establishing general laws is near impossible

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar History resources:

See all History resources »See all Historical Thinking resources »