Epistemological Questions: Is History a Science?


The theory that is involved in science and history is not the type where they are set in stone, but rather that which are open to refutation, verification, and modification. All hypotheses are subject to revision in light of this thinking.

The question whether History can be considered akin to science as a legitimate pursuit of knowledge must be addressed in order to truly understand the discipline of history, its methods, flaws, and complexities. This five part blog will focus on the issues surrounding this discussion.

2. History has no lessons

The argument that History can provide no verifiable lessons or generalizations about the world has been the cornerstone of any argument in favor of denouncing History as a scientific discipline. Of course, it is correct that History and the humble historian cannot predict the future. We do not know when the next revolution will occur. We do not know when the financial collapse will hit rock bottom.

This realization does not, however, stop social scientists from proffering their own ideas about society, its character, and its laws. This stubborn refusal to admit the historians limitations and purpose undermines the quality of analytical, diligent research done by the fact-finders throughout the profession of History. But it does serve, undoubtedly, the social function of History: In order to apply past events to present circumstances and potentially learn from others just like us.

To be sure, the most important generalization to be found in History is that people will never stop searching through the unknown for truth, in order to learn more about themselves.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Pyhton 3.4 - Continue

Conversations Ongoing: Valuing Modernization in Early European History

Conversations Ongoing: A Bunch of Amateurs