Sociology and the Historical Perspective

The Maclver Lecture presented at the 1968 annual meeting of the Southern Sociol'al Society, Atlanta, Ga, discussing the relationship between sociol & history. As a result of diff's between the sociol'al & the historical atmosphere, it is noted, students often overestimate the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The American sociologist 1970-11, Vol.5 (4), p.331-338
1. Verfasser: Erikson, Kai T.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The Maclver Lecture presented at the 1968 annual meeting of the Southern Sociol'al Society, Atlanta, Ga, discussing the relationship between sociol & history. As a result of diff's between the sociol'al & the historical atmosphere, it is noted, students often overestimate the degree to which the working arrangements of the other field are governed by some hidden method of approach, some implicit logic not readily apparent to outsiders. Such hidden method & implicit logic do not exist in reality. Whenever a sociol'st looks carefully at a human scene, he is observing a unique moment in historical time as well as an instance of some broader regularity, & thus the soc landscape he surveys does not differ in any appreciable way from the landscape viewed by the historian. The difficulties lie in diff usages of the 2 disciplines: sociol'ts have the notion that they are anchored to the present by the special logic of their methods & that they have a particular investment in the more general contours of soc life. These notions sometimes serve to mask a network of other barriers that lie below the visible surface & help keep the sociol'st confined within his own academic preserve. These barriers are built into the 'professional reflexes' through conceptualization & terminology. These "professional reflexes' are examined in detail. Historians are likely to feel that a given outcome is explained if they can relate a credible story about the sequence of events that led up to it or the motive that impelled it, while sociol'ss are likely to feel that an outcome is explained if they can trace its connection to other instit's && forces in the surrounding environment. Working with historical materials requires an approach to data tempered by a kind of skepticism & uncertainty-an awareness of self-that comes naturally to many experienced historians, but fits uneasily among the professional reflexes of most sociol'ts. It is shown how sociol'ts can profit from paying attention to the historical '`method.' Historical experience & consciousness can help to save sociol from both mindless antinomianism & brittle orthodoxy. M. Maxfield.
ISSN:0003-1232
1936-4784