Wallerstein - Open the Social Sciences.pdf

8/18/2019 Wallerstein - Open the Social Sciences.pdf

1/65


2/65

Oen e Sc Scence

R fGubk Cmm Ruug f


3/65


4/65


5/65


6/65

Foreword

The Calouste Gulbenian Foundation sponsored, inthe second half of the 1980' s, what became a rst, fruitful phase

of the project Portugal 000, generating valuable relections

about the framework for and main issues concerning the pos-

sible or probable trajectories of the Portuguese nation at the

dawn of the tentyrst century These thoughts and investiga-

tions have been published , in Portuguese , in the series Portu-gal The Next ent Years. "

A this initiative unfolded, the Foundation further sought to

support relections and endeavors on issues of a global

and on problems whose consideration and solutions are

crucial to the common search by societ for a better future n

this context, a survey of the social sciences and the role they per-

form, in terms both of the relations among the disciplines and of

their relationship ith the humanities a nd the natural sciences,

se em ed appropriate. The great intellectual achievements of the


7/65

x FOREWOR

pas hi o fo yeas eading o he moden sdy of ife

and o he sc ience of compexi he emeging need fo conex-

aiaion" of nivesaisms (which ges an inceasing dia-

oge eeen ces and he goh of nivesi edcaion

since he ae 1950'S a have songy inlenced he pacice of

socia scieniss ye ef pecios ie oom fo peoccpa-

ions of a sca and oganiaiona nae. In he pesen

sae of he evoion shod ovecoming he exising disci-pinay sce no e consideed a cena diemma fo he so-

cia sciences?

The C aose Genian Fondaion hs wecomed a po-

po sa y Pofes so Immane Waesein Dieco of he Fe-

nand Bade Cene of Binghamon nivesi o condc a

disingished inenaiona gop of schoassx om he so-

cia sciences o om he naa sciences and o omhe

hmaniiesin a elecon on he pesen socia sciences and

hei fe Conseqenly he Genian Commissi on on he

Rescing of he Socia Sciences was ceaed in Jy 1993,

ih Pofesso Walesein as is chai Is composiion elecs

oh he deph an he ide pe specive ha was nece ssay oachieve he anaysis pesened in he ex ha foows

Open the Social Sciences is a seios geneos and povoca-

ive ook which faihfy depics he amosphee and he vivac-

i of he Genian Commissi ons exchanges ding he o-

yea peiod ha foowed is ceaion. Thee penay meeings

wee hed: he s a he Fondaions he adqaes in Lison

in Jne 1994, he seco nd a he Maison deiene de omm ein Pais in Janay 1995, and he hid a'e Fenand BadeCene in Binghamon in Api 1995. Is ineeca level is pi

FOREWOR l

maiy de o he capaci of he eminen indiidas who s eved

on he Commission he ovea achievemen wod no

have een possiehohe enhsiasm deeminaion and

eadeship of Immane Waesein which we gaefy ac-

knowedge hee.

Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation


8/65

Members of the Commission

Immanuel Wallerstein chai of he Commiss ion so -

cioog SA Dieco of he Fenand Bade Cene fo he

Sdy of conomies isoica Sysems and Ciiiaions and

Disingished Pofes so of So cioog Binghamon nivesi

Pesiden Inenaiona Socioogica Associaion aho The

Mode Word-System (3 vol Unthinking Social Science.

Calestous Juma science and echnoog sdiesenya xecive Seceay N Convenion on iodivesi

Geneva fome xecive Dieco fican Cene fo echno-

og Sdies Naioi coaho Long-Run Economics: An

lutiona Approach to Economic Growth

Evelyn Fox Keller physics SA Pofesso o he

isoy and Phiosophy of Science Massachses Insie of

echnoog Mach Feow I99-I997; aho Rections

on Gender and Science

Jrgen Kocka hisoy Gemany Pofesso of he is-

oy of he Indsia Wod Feie nivesi Bein pema


9/65

xv MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION

nn Fow Wissnschafskog Bin Dico Cn fo

Conmpoay Hisoy Posdam aho Arbeitverhlnisse

und Arbeiterexistenzen; dio Bourgeo Socie in Nineteenth

Century Europe

Dominique Lecourt phiosophy Fanc Pofsso of

h Phiosophy and Hisoy of Scinc nivsi d Pais

Dnis Dido aho A quoi donc sert la philosophie? Des sci

ences de la nature aux sciences politiques; Promthe, Faust

Frankenstein Fondements imaginaires de l'thique

V Y Mudimbe Romanc angags Zai Wiiam R

Knan J Pofsso a Sanfod nivsi wh h achs in

h Dpamn of Compaaiv ia Fnch and Iaian

and Cassics and in h Afican Sdis and Modn Thogh

and Lia pogams Gna Scay Soci fo Afican

Phiosophy in Noh Aica aho The Invention ofica;

codioAica and th Disclines

Kinhide Mushkoji poiica scinc Japan Pofs

so Fac of Innaiona Sdis Mii Gakin nivsi

fom Psidn Innaiona Poiica Scinc ssociaion

fom VicRco fo Pogamm nid Naions nivsiPsidn Japans Conci fo Innaiona Affais aho

Global Issues and Intearadigmatic DialogueEssays on ul

tolar Politics

Iya Prigogine Vicom chmisy Bgim No

Pi fo Chmisy I977; Dico In sis Innaionax d

Physiq d Chimi fond pa E Sovay Dic Iya Pi

gogin Cn fo Sdis in Sh and Compx"l' }

Sysms nivsi of Txas a sin6

ho,

La nouvelle

alliance; Exploring Complexity; Entre e temps et leit

MEMBERS OF TH E C OMMISSION xv

Peter J. Taylor gogaphy K Pofsso of Goga

phy Loghoogh nivsi dio Political Geogphy; co

dio Review ofInteational Poltical Economy; aho Polit

ical Geogphy WordEconom NationState and Locali

Michel-Rolph Trouillot anhopoog Haii ri

gEisnhow Disingishd Pofsso of Anhopoog and

Dico Insi fo Goa Sdis in C Pow and

Hisoy Th Johns Hopins nivsi fom Chai di

soy Conci WnnGn Fondaion fo Anhopoogica

Rsach aho Silencing the Past Power and the oduc

tion of Histo; Peasants and Capital Dominica in the Word

Economy


10/65

Oen e S Sene

R fGubk Cmm Ruug f


11/65

The Historical Construction of

the Social Sciences� from the

Eighteenth Century to 1945

Think of lfe as an immense pro blem, an equation, orrather a famly of equations, partially dependent on each

other, partially independent . . . it bein understood thatthese equations are very complex, that they are fll ofsurprises, and that we are often unable to iscovertheir "roots.

Fernand Braudel'

Th ida ha w can c inigny on h naof hmans hi aions o ach oh and o spiiua focs

and h s ocia scs ha hy hav cad and ihin which

hy iv is a as as od as codd hisoy Th civd i

gios xs discss hs mas as do h xs w ca phio

sophica And th is h oa isdom ha has n passd on

hogh h ags a nd on p ino in fom a on poin oanoh No do much ofhis wisdom was h s of cing

indcvy om h funss of xpincd hman if in on o

anoh pa of h wod ov a ong piod of im vn

ss w psnd in h fom of vaion o aiona

ducion om som inhn na hs

ha w oday ca socia scinc is hi o his isdom I

is howv a isan hi and phaps on an ngaf and

I. Fernand Braudel, preface to Chares Moraz, Les bourgeois con-qurants (Paris Libraire rmand Colin, I957).


12/65

HISTORICAL CONSTRCTION

nacknowdging hi fo socia scinc consciosy dnd i

sf as h sch fo hs ha wn yond sch civd o

ddcd isdom. Socia scinc is an npis of h modn

wod Is oos i in h amp fon sinc h sxnh

cny and pa and pac of h conscion of o modn

wod o dvop sysmaic sc knowdg ao ai

ha is somhow vaidad mpiicay This ook h nam of sci

entia which simpy man knowdg Of cos phiosophymoogicay aso mans knowdg o mo pcisy h

ov of knowdg

Th s ocad cassica iw of sc inc pdominan fo sv

a cnis now was i on o pmiss On was h Nw

onian mod in which h xiss a smmy n pas

and f This was a qasihoogica ision ik God w can

aain cids and hfo do no nd o disingish

n pas and f sinc vhing coxiss in an na

psn Th scond pmis was Casian daism h as

smpion ha h is a fndamna isincion n na

and hmans n ma and mind n h physica

wod and h sociaspiia wod hn Thomas Hook wp h sas of h Roya Soci in 1663 h inscid as is

ociv o impov h knowdg of naa hings an a

sf As Manfacs Mchanick paciss Engns and

Invnions y Expimns" adding h phas no mding

ih Diini Maphysics Moas Poiicks Gamm Rh

oicks o Logick" Ths sas incanad aady h dii

2. Cited in Sir Henry Lyons, The RoyalSO� 10-140 ( New York:Greenwood Press I968), p I

EIGHTEENTH C ENTRY TO 1945 3

sion of h ways of knoing ino wha C P Snow wod a ca

h o cs"

Scinc cam o dnd a s h sach fo nivsa aws of

na ha maind ov a ofim and spac Axand

Ko acing h ansfomaion of opan concpions of

spac om h fnh o h ighnh cny nod

The innite Universe of the Ne Cosmology innite in Duration as

ell as in Extension, in hich e ternal matter in accordance th

eternal and necessar las moves endlessl and aimlessl in eteral

space i nherited all the ontological attributes o f Dinity. Yet onl

those-all the others the departed God took aa th Him 3

Th oh ais of h dpd God w of cos h

moa vas of a Chisian wod sch as ov hmii chi

Ko dos no h mak on h vas ha cam in hi

pac w know ha h dpad God did no qi av

a moa vacm hind If h ss w ifd yond imi

so oo w hman amiions Pogss cam h opaiv

wod now ndowd h h nwy acqid sns of innid

and infocd y h maia achivmns o f chnoog.

Th wod" of which Ko spaks is no h si

go h cosm os Indd on migh ag ha ov h

sam piod h pcpion of sia spac in h Wsn

wod was dgoing a ansfomaion in h vs

owad nid Fo mos pop iwas ony wih h voyags

discovy avsing h go ha h ah cosd in ono

sphica fom To s h cicmfnc of his sph was

fa ga han h on Coms had imagind i was

Aexandre Kor, Frm the Csed Wrd t the Innite Universe(Baltimore: Johns Hopns Universit Press, I97), p. 276


13/65

4 HISTORICAL C ONSTRCTION

nonthlss nit Furthrmor with us and ovr tim ths

sam voyags of discovry stablishd th commrcial routs

and th consqunt nlargd divisions of labor that would

stadily shrink social and tmporal distancsHowever, this nitude of the earth was not, at least not until

recently, a source of discouragement. "ile the ideal and the

ision of unlimited progress drew sustenance om the innities

of time and space, the practical realization of progress in human

affairs through technological advance depended on the know-

abilit and explorabilit of the world, on a condence in its ni-

tude in certain key dimensions (especially its epistemology and

geography . Indeed, it was generally supposed that achieing

progress required that we rid ourselves completely of all inhibi-tions and restraint in our role as discoverers seeing to uncover

the inner secrets and to tap the resources of a world ithin

reach. Up until the te!tieth century, it seems that the nitude

of the earthly sphere served primarily to facilitate the explo-

rations and exploitation demanded by progres s, and to make

practical and realizable Western aspirations to dominion. In the

tentieth century, as terrestrial distances began to shrink to a level that seemed to be constraining, the limitations of the earth

could even be invoked as added incentive for the ever mor up-

ward and outard explorations needed to enlarge that sphere of

dominance still fther. In short, the abode of our present and

past habitation came to look less like a home base and more like

a launching pad, the place from which we, as men (and a few women) of science, could soar into

p

ce .

,

st

bl i

sh n

g

a position

of mastery over an ever more cosmicu

ni;

�

Progrss and discovry may b th ky words hr but othr

EIGHTEENTH CENTRY TO 1945 5

trmsscinc unit simplicit mastry and vn th uni-

vrs" ar ndd to complt th lxicon Natural scinc as

it was constructd in th svntnth and ightnth cnturis

drivd primarily from th study of clstial mchanics t rst

thos who attmptd to stablish th lgitimacy and priorit of

th scintic sarch for th laws of natur mad littl distinction

btn scinc and philosophy To th xtnt that thy distin-

guishd th to domains thy thought of thm as allis in thsarch for scular truth But as xprimntal mpirical work b-

cam vr mor cntral to th ision of scinc philosophy b-

gan to sm to natural scintists mor and mor a mr substi-

tut for tholog qually guilt of a priori assrtions of truth

that wr untstabl By th bginning of th nintnth cn-

tury th division of knowldg into to domains had lost th

sns of thir bing sparat but qual" sphrs and took on

th lavor of a hirarchy at last in th ys ofnatural scintists

knowldg that was crtain (s cinc) vrsus knowldg that was

imagind vn imaginary (what was not scinc) Finally in th

bginning of th nintnth cntury th triumph of scinc was

nsconcd linguistically Th trm scinc" without a spci-ing adctiv cam to b quatd primarily (oftn xclusivly)

with natural scinc This fact markd th culmination of th

attmt of natural scinc to acquir for itslf a VV

tual lgitimacy tha was totally sparat from indd vn in

position to anothr form ofnowldg calld philosophy

This clear Enlish and in e Romance lanuaes. lessclear in German, where e erm Wissenschaft coninues o be used as aeneral erm for sysemaic knowlede and where wha in nlish arecalled he "humaniies are called Geisteswissenschaften which rans

laes lierally as knowlede of spiriual or menal maers.


14/65


15/65

8 HISTORICAL CONSTRCTION

ls o pomo h n aa scincs Th n aal sciniss

phaps dd no nd h nivsiis o ps hi wok

I was ah hos who w no naal scinisshisoi

ans classiciss scholas of naiona liaswho id mos o

viv h nivsis in h cos of h ninnh cny

sing i as a mchanism o oain sa sppo fo hi schol

alywok Thy plld h naal scinss ino h goning

nivsi scs hy poing fom h posiiv pol

of h naal sciniss. Th sl howv was ha fom hn

on h nivsiis cam h pimay si of h conning

nsion n h as (hmaniis and h scincs which

w now ing dnd as qi diffn and fo som anago

nisic ways of knoing

In many conis cainly in Ga Biain and Fanc i

was h clal phaval ogh ao y h Fnch Rvol

on ha focd a e n claicaon of h da T ps

s fo polical and social ansfomaion had gaind an

gncy and a lgimacy ha cold no asily conaind any

long simpl y poclaiming hois ao a spposdly na

al od of social lif Insad many agd ha h solionlay ah in oganiing ad aionaliing h social ch ang ha

now smd o inial in a wold in which h sovgn

of h popl" was fas coming h nom no do hoping

hy o limi is xn. B if on w o ogani and aio

nali social chang on had s of all o sdy i and nd

sand h ls which govnd i Th was no only spac fo

a dp socia nd fo wha wh

com o call social sci\

nc Fhmo i smd o follow

if on w o y o

ogani a nw social od on a sal as h mo xac ( o

EIGHTEENTH C ENTRY TO I95 9

posiiv" h scinc phaps h Wih his in iw

many of hos who gan o lay h ass of modn social sci

nc in h s half of h ninnh cny mos noaly in

Ga Biain and Fanc nd o Nwonian physics as a

modl o mla

Ohs mo concnd ih niing h social ni of

h sas which had ndgon o w hand y social dis

pion lookd o h laoaion of naional hisoical ac

cons o ndpin h nw o ponal sovigns accons

ha w howv now lss accons of pincs han of po

pls" Th fomlaion of hisoy" as gechichte hap

pnd wha reallyhappnd was hogh o giv i impccal

cdnials Hisoy wold cas o a hagiogaphy sing

monachs and com h soy of h pas xplaining h

psn offing h asis of is choic fo h f This

ind of hiso (asd on mpiical achival sach oind so

cial scinc and naal scinc in cing spclaion" an d

ddcion" (pacics which w said o m philoso

phy" B pcisly cas his nd of hisoy was dply con

cnd wih h sois of popls ach mpiically diffnom h oh i lookd wih sspicion vn hosili pon h

amps of h xponns of h nw social scinc" o gn

ali ha is o salish nivsal laws of soci

In h cos of h ninnh cny h vaios

plins spad o lik a fan coving a ang of

pos iions on nd lay s mahmacs (a nonmpiical ac

ii and nx o i h xpimnal naal scincs (hm

slvs in a so of dscnding od of dminismphysics

chmisy iolog . h oh nd lay h hmanis ( o as


16/65

0 HISTORICAL CONSRCTION

and ls saing h philosophy (h pndan ofmahma

ics as a nonmpiical acivi and nx o i h sdy of fomal

aisic pacics (lias paining and sclp msicol

og on coming clo s in hi pacic o ing hisoy a his

oy of h as And in n h hmaniis and h naal

scincs hs dnd lay h sdy of social ais h

hisoy ( idiogaphic clos o ofn pa of faculis of as and

ls and social scinc" (nomohic clos o h naal

scincs Amids an vhadning spaion of nowldg

ino o dffn sphs ach h a diffn pismological

mphasis h sdns of social aliis fond hmslvs

cagh in h middl and dply diidd on hs pismolog

cal isss

All his hov as occing in a conx in hich (N

onian ) scinc had imphd ov (spclaiv) philosophy

and had hfo com o incna social psig in h old

of noldg This spli n scinc and philosophy had

n poclaimd as a divoc y gs Com alhogh in

ali i psnd pimaily h cion of Aisolian ma

physics and no of philosophical concns p s Nonhlssh isss posd smd o al: is h old govnd y d

minisic las? o is h a plac a ol fo ( human ivn

ivnss and imaginaion? Th inllcal issus fuh

mo ovlain ih hi puaiv poliical implicaions. Polii

cally h concp of dminisic las smd mo sfl fo

amps a chnocaic conol of ponially anachi mov

mns fo chang And poliically th � f ns of h picla

h nondmind h imaginaiv

mo sfl no

only fo hos ho sising chnocaic chang in h

EIGHTEENTH CENTRY TO 945

nam of consving ising insiions and adiions a lso

fo hos who w sggling fo mo sponanos mo ad

cal possiiliis of ining hman agncy ino h sociopoli

cal ana In his da which was coninos nlancd

h ocom in h wold of nowldg was ha scinc

(physics was vwh placd on a pdsal and in many

conis philosophy was lgad o an v small con of

h nivsi sysm On spons of som philosophs was

vnally o dn hi acivis in ways mo consonan

ih h scinic hos (h analyic philosophy of h Vinna

posiiiss

Scinc was poclaimd o h discovy of ojciv al

i sing a mhod ha nald us o go outside h mind

whas philosophs w said mly o cogia and i

ao hi cogiaions This w of scinc and philosophy was

assd qi claly y Com and John Sa Mill in h s

half of h ninnh cny as hy undoo o lay don h

ls ha wold govn analyss of h social wold In viving

h m social physics" Com mad cl his poliical con

cs H ishd o sav h Ws om h sysmaic copion" which had com cd ino an indspns al ool of

govning" cas of h inllcal anachy ha had n

manifs sinc h Fnch Rvolion In his viw h pa

od was asing islf on omodd docins ( Caholic and

dal whil h p of movmn was asing islf on

ngaiv and dsuciv hss dawn fom Posanism Fo

Com social physics wold pmi h conciliaion of od

and pogss y ning ov h solion of social qsions

o a small nm of li inlligncs" ih h appopia


17/65


ducation. Inthis way th Rvolution would b trminatd" by

th installation of a nw spiritual powr. Th tchnocratic basis

and th so cial function of th nw social physics was thus clar.

In this nw structur of knowldg philosophrs would b-

com in a clbratd formula th spcialists of gnralitis."

hat this mant was that thy would apply th logic of clstial

mchanics (brought to prfction in PirrSimon Laplac's vr-

sion of th Nwonian prototp) to th social world. Positiv

scinc was intndd to rprsnt total libration from tholog

and mtaphysics and all othr mods of xplaining" ralit.

Our rsarchs thn in vry branch of knowldg if thy ar

to b pos itiv must b connd to th study of ral facts without

sing to now thir rst ca uss or nal purpos. " 5

Comt' s English countrpart and corrspondnt John Stuart

Mill spok not of positiv scinc but of xact scinc but th

modl of clstial mchanics rmaind th sam: [th scinc

of human natur] falls far short of th standards of xactnss

now ralid in stronomy; but thr is no rason that it should

not b as much a scinc as Tidolog is or as stronomy was

whn its calculations had only astrd th main phnomnabut not th prturbations ." 6

lthough th undrpinnings of th diisions ithin th social

scincs wr clarly crystalliing in th rst half of th nin-

tnth cntury it was only in th priod 18501914 that th in-

tllctual divrsication rlctd in th disciplinary structurs

uuste Comte, A Discurse n the Psitive pirit (London:Wllam Reeves, I93), p . I.

6 ohn Stuart Mll, A stem f Lgic Rl2ca and Inductive, vol. 8 of Cected Wrks f hn tuart Mi (Toronto Unverst ofToronto Press, I97), bk. 6, chap. 3, para , p 86.

EIGHTEENTH CENTRY TO 1945

of th social scincs was formally rcognid in th principal

univrsitis in th forms thatw now thm today. To b sur in

th priod btn 1500 and 1850 thr had alrady xistd a lit

ratur concrning many of th cntral qustions tratd in

whatw today call so cial scinc th functioning of political in-

stitutions th macroconomic policis of th stats th ruls

govrning intrstat rlations th dscription of nonEuropan

social systms . Today w still rad N iccolo Machiavlli and Jan

Bodin William Ptt and Hugo Grotius th Frnch Physiocrats

and th Scottish Enlightnmnt as wll as th authors of th

rst half of th nintnth cntury from Thomas Malthus

and Daid Ricardo to Fraois Guiot and lxis d Tocquill

to Johann Hrdr and Johann Ficht. W vn hav in this p-

riod arly discussions of social dvianc as in Csar Bccaria.

But all this was not yt quit what w hav com to man today by

social scinc and non of ths scholars yt thought of himslf

as oprating within th framwork ofwhat latr wr cons idrd

th sparat disciplins.

Th cration of th multipl disciplins of social scinc was

part of th gnral nintnthcntury attmpt to scur and ad-vanc objctiv" nowldg about ralit" on th basis of m-

pirical ndings (as opposd to spculation") . Th intnt was to

larn" th truth not invnt or intuit it. Th procss of institu-

tionaliation of this ind of knowldg actiitwas not at all sim-

pl or straightforward. For on thing it was not at rst clar

whthr this actiit was to b a singular on or should rathr b

diidd into th svral disciplins as latr occurrd. Nor was it

at th outst clar what was th bst rout to such nowldg

that is what ind of pistmolog would b most fruitful or vn


18/65

HISTORICAL CONSTRCTION

lgitimat. Last of all was it clar whthr th social scincs

could in som sns b thought to constitut a third cultur"

that was btn scinc and litratur" in th latr formula-

tion of Wolf Lpnis. In fact non of ths qustions has vr

bn dnitivly rsolvd All w can do is to not th actual d-

cisions that wr mad or th majorit positions that tndd to

prvail.

Th rst thing to not is whr this institutionaliation took

plac. Thr wr v main locals for social scinc activit

during th nintnth cntury: Grat Britain Franc th Gr-

manis th Italis and th Unitd Stats. Mo st of th scholars

most ofth univrsitis (of cours not all) wr locatd in ths

v placs Th univrsitis in othr countris lackd th nu-

mrical wight or in trnationa prstig of thos in ths v. To

this day most of th nintnthcntury works that w still rad

wr rittn in on ofhs v local s.

Th scond thing to not is that a vry larg and divrs st o f

nams of subjct mattrs" or disciplins" wr put forward

during th cours of th cntury. Howvr by th First World

War thr was gnral convrgnc or consnsus around a fwspcic nams and th othr candidats wr mor or lss

droppd. Ths nams as w shall discuss wr primaril v:

history conomics socio log political scinc and anthropol-

og. On might add to this list as w shall s th so calld Ori-

ntal scincs ( calld Orintalism in English) dspit th fact

that thy slfconsciously did not consdr thmslvs social sci-

ncs . Whyw do not includ ggay,

psycholog and law in

this lis w shall xplainblow.

�

Th rst of th social scinc disciplins to achiv an au


tonomous institutional xistnc was history. It is tru that

many historians igorously rjctd th labl of social scinc

and som still do s o today. W howvr rgard th quarrls b-

tn th historians and th othr social scinc disciplins a s

quarrls within social scinc as w shall try to mak clar as w

procd. History was of cours a longstanding practic and th

trm itslf is ancint. ccounts of th past particularly accounts

of th past of on's o popl on's stat wr a familiar activ-

it in th world of knowldg. And hagiography had always bn

ncouragd by thos in powr. hat distinguishd th nw dis-

ciplin" of history as it dvlopd in th nintnth cntury

was th rigorous mphasis it put on th sarch to nd out wie es

eigenich gewesen ist (what rally happnd") in Rank's fa-

mous phras. opposd to what? Most of all as opposd to

tlling storis that wr imagind or xaggratd bcaus thy

lattrd th radrs or srvd th immdiat purposs of rulrs

or any othr powrful groups .

It is hard to miss how much this Rankian slogan rlctd th

thms usd by scinc" in its struggl ith philosophy" th

mphasis on th xistnc of a ral world that is objctiv andowabl th mphasis on mpirical vidnc th mphasis on

th nutralit of th scholar. Furthrmor th historian lik th

natural scintist was not supposd to nd his data in priorW1 >

ings (th library locus of rading) or in his own thought

cs ss (th study locus of rlction) but rathr in a plac whr

objctiv xtrnal data could b assmbld stord controlld

and manipulatd (th laboratory th archiv loci of rsarch) .

This common rjction o f spculativ philosophy drw his-

tory and scinc togthr as modrn" (that is not mdival)


19/65

16 HISTORICAL CONSTRCTION

mods ofnowldg But sinc th histoians w also jcting

philosophy insofa as it ntaild th sach fo gnal schmas

which nabld on to xplain mpiical data thy flt that a

sach fo scintic laws" of th social wold would only lad

thm back into o It is this doubl maning fo histoians of

thi jction of philosophy that xplains how thy could in

thi wok not only lct th nw dominanc in Euopan

thought of th pimacy of scinc but also b th stong halds

and poponnts of an idiogaphic antithoiing stanc It is fo

this ason that thoughout th nintnth cntuy most his-

toians insistd that thy blongd in facultis of ltts and

tndd to b way of any idntication ith th nw catgoy

th social scincs that was slowly coming into fashion

hil it is tu that som ofth aly nintnthcntuy his-

toians statd outith som visions of a univsal histoy (a last

link ith tholog) th combination of thi idiogaphic com-

mitmnts and th social pssus coming om th stats as wll

as fom ducatd public opinion pushd histoians in th dic-

tion of witing pimaily thi own national histois th dni-

tion of the nation being more or less circumscribed by a pushback in tim of th spac occupid in th psnt by th stat

boundais in xistnc o in constuction. In any cas th m-

phasis of histoians on th us of achivs basd on an indpth

contxtual nowldg of th cultu mad histoical sach

sm most valid whn pfomd in on's own bacad Thus it

was that histoians who had not wantd to ngag any long in

justiing kngs found thmslvs e'l

ag ed in justing "na-

tions" and oftn thi nw sovignst

�\

popls

''

This was no doubt usful to th stats but only indictly in


tms of infocing thi social cohsion It did not hlp thm

to dcid on is policis in th psnt and ctainly od

littl isdom about th modatis of ational fomism B-

n 1500 and 180, th vaious stats had alady bcom ac-

customd to tuning to spcialists oftn ciil svants to hlp

thm fog policy paticulaly in thi mcantilist momnts

Ths spcialists offd thi knowldg und many ubics

such as juispudnc (an old tm) and law ofth nations ( a nw

on) political conomy ( also a nw tm indcating quit lit-

ally macoconomics at th lvl of th politis) statistics (an-

oth nw tm fing initially to quantitativ data about th

stats) and Kamelwissenschaften (administativ scincs)

Juispudnc was alady taught in th facultis o flaw of th

univsitis and Kamelwissenschaften bcam a subjct in

Gmanic univsitis in th ightnth cntuy Howv only

in th nintnth cntuy do w bgin to nd a disciplin calld

conomics somtims ithin th facult oflaw but oftn ithin

th facult (s omtims xfacult) of philosophy And givn th

pvailing libal conomic thois of th nintnth cntuy

th phas p olitical conomy" (popula in th ightnth cn-tuy) disappas in favo of conomics" by th scond half of

th nintnth cntuy By stipping away th adjctiv politi-

cal" conomists could agu that conomic bhavio was th

lction of a univsal individualist psycholog ath than

socially constuctd institutions an agumnt which could thn

b usd to asst th natualnss oflai ssfai pincipls

Th univsaliing assumptions of conomics mad th study

of conomics vy psnt ointd a sult conomic his-

toy was always lgatd to a mino plac in conomics cuic


20/65


ula, and the subdiscipline of economic history developed largely

out of (and partially separated itself from) history more than out

of economics. The one major attempt in the nineteenth century

to develop a social science that was neither nomothetic nor idio

graphic but rather a search for the rules governing historically

specic social systems was the construction in the Germanic

zone of a eld called StaatswissenschaftenThis eld covered (in

presentday terms) a mixture of economic history, urispru-

dence, sociolog, and economicsinsisting on the historical

specicit of dfferent states" and maing none of the dscipli-

nary distinctions that were coming into use in Great Britain and

rance The very name Staatswissenschaften ( sciences of the

state") indicated that its proponents were seeng to occupy

somewhat the same intellectual space that political economy"

had covered earlier in G rea t Britain and rance, and therefore to

serve the same funct!n of proiding knowledge that would beuseful, at least in the longer run to the states. This disciplinary

invention lourished part icularly in the second half of the nine-

teenth century but ultimately succumbed to attacks from ith-

out and cold feet from ithin. In the rst decade of the tentiethcentury, German social sc ience began to conform to the discipli-

nary categories in use in Great Britain and rance . Someofthe

leading younger gures in Staatswissenschaften such as M

Weber, took the lead in founding the German Sociological Soci-

et. B the 1920', the term Sozialwissenschaften (social sci-

ences" ) had displacedStaatswissenschaften

t the same time thatenmi

was

becoming an estab-

lished discipline in theuivesiies-

p}

sen

oriented and no-

mothetica totally new discipline was being invented, ith an

EIGHTEENTH C ENTRY TO 1945 1

invented name: sociolog. or the inventor, Comte, sociolog

was to be the queen ofthe sciences, an integrated and unied so-

cial science thatwas positiist," another Comteian neologsm.

In practice, however, sociolog as a dscipline developed in the

second half of the nineteenth century, principally out of the in-

stitutionalization and transformation thin the universities of

the work of social reform ass ociations, whose agenda had been

primarily that of dealing ith the dscontents and dsorders of

the muchenlarged urban worngclass populations . By mong

their work to a universit setting, these social reformers largely

surrendered their role of active, immediate legislative lobbing.

But sociolog has always nonetheless retained its concern th

orinary people and with the social consequences of modernit.

Partly in order to consummate the break ith its origins in social

reform organizations sociologsts began to cultivate a positiist

thrust, which, combined with their orientation toward the pres-

ent, pushed them as wellinto the nomothetic camp.

Political science as a discipline emerged still later, not be-

cause its subject matter, the contemporary state and its politics,

was less amenable to nomothetic analysis, but primarily becauseof the resistance of faculties of law to eld their monopoly in

ths arena. The resistance oflaw faculties may explain the impor-

tance given by political scientists to the study of political

ophy, sometimes under the name of political theory, at least

until the socalled behaiorist revolution of the post945 pe�

riod . Political philosophy allowed the new discipline of political

science to claim a heritage that went back to the Greeks and to

read authors that had long had an assured place in university

curricula.


21/65

HSTORCAL CONSTRUCTON

Still, political phi losophy was not enough to justi ceating a

new discipine; it could, afte all, have continued to be taught

within philosophy depatments, and indeed it was. Political sci-

ence as a sepaate isci pline accomplished a futhe objective: it

legitimated economics as a sepaate discipline. Political econ-

omy had been ejected as a subject matte because of the agu-

ment that the state and the maket opeated and should opeate

by distinctive logics. In the long un, this logically equied as its

guaantee the establishment of a sepaate scientic study of the

political aena.

The quatet of histoy, economics, sociolog, and political

science, as they became univesit disciplines in the nineteenth

centuy (and indeed ight up to 945 not only wee pacticed

pimaily in the ve counties of thei collective oigin but wee

lagely concened with descibing social ealit in the same ve

counties. It not that the univesities of these ve counties

totally ignoed the est of the wold. It is athe that they sege-

gated thei study into dieent disciplines .

The ceation of the moden woldsystem involved the uo-

pean encounte with, and in most cases conquest of, the peoplesof the est of the wold. In tems of the categoies of uopean

expeience, they encounteed to athe diffeent inds of peo-

ples and social stuctues . Thee wee peoples who lived in ela-

tively small goups, who had no system of witten ecods, who

did not seem to shae in a geogaphically falung eligious sys-

tem, and who wee militaily weak in elation to uopean tech-

nolog. Geneic tems to descbe uh people s came into

use: in nglish, they wee usually alleie

In some othe

languages, they wee called aces" (although this tem late

EGHTEENTH CENTURY TO 94 5

dopped ou t of use, because of its confusions with the othe use

of ace s," efeing to athe lage goupings of human beings

on the basis of sin colo and othe biological attibutes). The

study of these people s became the domain of a new discipline

called anthopolog. sociolog had lagely begun as the activ-

it of social efom associations outside the univesities, so had

anthopolog lagely begun outside the univesit as a pactice

of exploes, taveles, and ofcials of the colonial seces of

the uopean powes. Like socio log, it subse quently became in-

stitutionalized as a univesit discipline, but one that was quite

segegated om the othe social sciences, which studied the

Westen wold.

hile some ealy anthopologists wee attacted to the uni-

vesal natual histoy of humankind (and its pesumed stages of

development ) , just as ealy histoians wee attacted to univesal

histoy, the social pessues of the extenal wold pushed an-

thopologists into becoming ethnogaphes of paticula peo-

ples , usually chosen fom among those found in the intenal o

extenal colonie s of thei county. This then almost ineitably

implied a quite specic methodolog, built aound eldwok(theeby meeting the equiement of the scientic ethos of em-

piical eseach) and paticipant obsevation in one paticula

aea (meeting the equiement of achieving he indepth

edge of the cultue equied fo undestanding, so difcult to

quie in a cultue vey stange to the scientist )

Paticipant obsevation always theatened toviolate the ideal

of scientic neutalit, as id the temptation fo the anthopolo-

gist (simila to that of the missionaies) to become a mediato

fo the people he/she studied with the uopean conqueing


22/65

22 HSTORCAL CONSTRUCTON

wod, especiay since he anhopoogis ended o e a ciien

of he cooniing powe of he peope eing sdied ( e g , Biish

anhopoogiss in easen an d sohen Afica, ench anho-

poogiss in Wes Afica, U.S. anhopoogiss in Gam o sdy-

ing Ameican Indians, Iaian anhopoogiss in Liya I was

hei anchoing in he sces of he nivesi ha was mos

inenia in consaining anhopoogiss o mainain he pac-

ice of ehnogaphy wihin he nomaive pemises of science

hemoe, a seach fo he pisine peconac" sae of

ces pshed ehnogaphes owad a eief ha hey wee

deaing wih peopes wiho hisoy," in Eic Wofs pngen

fomaion This migh have ned hem owad a pesen-

oiened, nomoheic sance ain o economiss, and afe 945

sca anhopoog wod ake pecisey his n Bwha

ook pioi iniiay was he need o si he sdy of diffe-

ence and o defend heoa egiimacy of no eing Eopean

And heefoe, fooing he same ogic as ha of he eay hiso-

ians, anhopoogiss esised he demand o fomae aws,

pacicing fo he mos pa an idiogaphic episemoog

A nonEopean peopes cod no, howeve, e cassied asies" Eopeans had ong had co nac ih ohe socaed

high civiiaions," sch as he aIsamic wod and China

These ones wee consideed high" civiiaions y Eopeans

pecisey ecase hey did have iing, did have eigios sys-

ems ha wee geogaphicay idespead, and wee oganied

poiicay (a eas fo ong seches of ime in he fom of

age, eacaic empies Euopesuy of hese ciiia

ions had egn wih he medieva cl�s Beeen he hieenh and he eigheenh cenies, hese civiiaions" wee

si miiaiy sfcieny esisan o Eopean conqes ha

EGHEENTH CENTURY TO 945

hey meied espec, even someimes admiaion , and ye, o e

se , pemen a s we

In he nineeenh ceny, howeve, as a es of Eopes

fhe echnooica advances , hese ciiiaions " wee made

ino Eopean coonies, o a eas ino semicoonies Oiena

sdies, whos e oigina home was in he Chch and whos e oig-

ina sicaion was as an aiiay o evangeiaion, ecame a

moe seca pacice, evenay nding a pace in he evoving

discipinay sces of he nivesiies The insiionaia-

ion of Oiena sdies was in fac peceded y ha of he an-

cien Medieanean wod, wha in Engish was caed he cas-

sics," he sdy of Eopes own aniqi This was aso a sdy

of a civiiaion ha was diffeen fom ha of moden Eope ,

iwas no eaed in he same way as Oiena sdies. Rahe

i was co nsideed o e he hisoy of hose peopes who wee

dened as he ancesos of moden Eope, nike, say, he

sdy of ancien Egp o of Mesopoamia The ciiiaion of an-

iqi was expicaed as he eay phase of a singe coninos

hisoica deveopmen ha cminaed in moden Wesen"

ciiiaion I was hs seen as pa of a singe saga s an-iqi, hen ih aaian conqes he conini poided

y he Chch, hen ih he Renaissance he eincopoaion

of he GecoRoman heiage and he ceaion of he

wod In his sense, aniqi had no aonomos

ahe, i consied he pooge of modeni By conas,

foowing he same ogic , e ohe ciiiaions " had no

aonomos hisoy eihe ahe, hey ecame he soy of

hisoies ha wee foen , ha had no pogessed, ha had

no cminaed in modeni

Cas sics was pimaiy a ieay sdy, ahogh i oviosy


23/65

HSTORCAL CONSTRCTON

overlapped ith the historical stdy of Greece and Rome In

seein to create a discipline separate om philosophy (and the-

olo) , the classicists dened their sbject matter as a combina-

tion of all inds of literatre (not merely the ind which philoso-

phers reconized) , th e arts (and its new adnct, archaeolo),

and sch history as cold be done in the mode of the new history

(which was not too mch, iven the pacit of primary sorces )

This combination made classic s close in practice to the simlta-

neosly emern disciplines that focsed on the national litera-

tres of each ofthe maor Western ropean states

The bellettristic tone of classics set the scene for the many

varietes of Oriental stdies that bean to enter the niversit

crricla. Given their premises, however, Orientalist scholars

adopted a very special practice. hat became of interest was not

reconstrcn iachronic seqences, as for Eropean history,

since this history was no� presmed to proress What was of in-

terest was nderstanin and appreciatin the set of vales and

practices that created civilizations which, althoh considered

to be hih" ciilizations, were nonetheless thoht to be im-

mobile. Sch nderstandin cold best be achieved, it was ar-ed, by a close readin of the texts that incarnated their wis-

dom; and this reqired linistic and philoloical sills, qite

ain to those that had been taditionally sed by the mon in

the stdy of Christian texts In this sense, Oriental stdies re-

sisted modernit altoether and was nottherefore caht p for

the most part in the scientic ethos. Even more than the histori-

ans, the Orientalist scholars saw no vr' e in social science, and

riorosly shnned association ith th e"

b

m a n, preferrin to

consider themselves part of the hmanities " Still, they lled

EGHTEENTH CENTRY TO 945

an important niche in the social sciences since, for a lon time,

Orientalist scholars were irtally the only ones in the niversit

who enaed in the stdy of social realities that related to China,

or Inia, or Persia There were, to be sre, n addition a few so-

cial scientists who were interested in comparin Oriental civi-

lizations with Western ciilizations ( sch as Max Weber, Arnold

Tonbee , and, less systematically, Karl Marx). Bt these compar-

atiist scholars, nlie the Orientalist scholars, were not con-

cerned ith Oriental civlizations for their own sae Rather,

their primary intellecal concern was always to explain why it

was the Western world, and not these other cilizations, that

went forward to modernit ( or capitalism )

word needs to be said as well of three elds that never qite

made it as principal components of the social sciences: eora-

phy, psycholo, and law Georaphy, lie history, ws an an-

cient practice In the late nineteenth centry, it reconstrcted

itself as a new discipline, primarily in German niversities,

which served to inspire developments elsewhere hile the con-

cerns of eraphy were primarily those o f a social science, it

resisted cateorization It soht to bride the ap th the nat-ral sciences throh its concern ith physical eoraphy, as

well as ith the hmanities throh its concern with what was

called hman eoraphy (in some ways doin wor similar

that of anthropoloists, thoh ith an emphasis on

mental inlences ) . rthermore, eoraphy was he one

pline in the period before 945 that in practice cons ciosly tried

to be trly worldide in terms of its sbject matter This was its

irte and perhaps its ndoin s the stdy of social realit

became increasinly compartmentalized in the late nineteenth


24/65

HSTORCAL CONSTRUCTON

century into separate disciplines, ith a clear diision of labor,

geography appeared anachronistic in its generalist, synthesiz-

ing, nonanaltic penchants.

Probably in consequence, geography remained through all

this period a sort of poor relation in terms of numbers and pes-

tige, often serving merely as a ind of minor adjunct to history.

a result, treatment of space and place was relatively neglected

in the social sciences . The focus on progress and the politics of

organizing social change made the temporal dimension of social

existence crucial, but left the spatia dimension in limbo If

proces ses were universal and deterministic, space was theoreti-

caly irrelevant. If processes verged on being unique and un-

repeatable, space became merely one element (and a minor one )

of specicity. In the former iew, s pacewas see n as merelya plat-

fom upon which events unfolded or processe s operatedessen-

tially inert, just there ad no more In the latter iew, space be-

cam e a context inluencing events (in idiographic history, in e-

alist international relations, in neighborhood effects, even in

Marshallian externalities ) . But for the most part, these contex

tual effects were seen as mere inluencesresiduals that had tobe taken into account to get better empirical results, but ones

that were not central to the analysis.

Nonetheess , social science in practice based itself on a par-

ticular iew of spatiality, albeit one that was unavowed. The set

of spatial sructures through which social scientists assumed

lives were organized were the sovereign territories that collec-

tively dened the world pol itical map.N yall social scientists

assumed that these political boundaries ed the spatial paa-

meters of other key interactions the sociologist's society, the

EGHTEENTH CENTURY TO 945

macroeconomists national economy, the political scientists

polity, the historian's nation. ach assumed a fundamental spa-

tial conguence between political, social, and economic pro-

cess es. In this sense, social science was very much a creature, if

not a creation, of the states , taing their boundaries as crucial

social containers.

Psychology was a different case. Here too , the discipline sepa-

rated out of philosophy, seeing to recon stitute itself in the new

scientic form Its practice, however, came to be dened as lying

not in the social arena but primarily in the medical arena, which

meant that its legitimacy depended on the closeness of its as soci-

ation ith the natural sciences. urthermore, the positiists,

sharing the premise of Comte (the eye cannot look at itsel') ,

pushed psychology in this direction. or many, the only psychol-

ogy that could be scientically legitimate would be one that was

physiological, even chemical. Hence these psychologists s ought

to move beyond social science to become a biological sci-

ence, and consequently in most univesities psychology eventu

ally shifted its berth from faculties of the social sciences to those

ofthe natural sciences .There were, of course, forms of psychological theorizing

which placed their emphasis on the analysis of the individual in

society. These socaled social psychologists did try to remain ! {. ·i:

ithin the camp of social science. But social psychology was fo;: :

the most part not successful in establishing a full institutional

autonomy, and suffered visis psychology the same ind of

marginalization that economic histoy suffered visvis eco-

nomics. In many cases, it surived bybeing absorbed as a subdis

ci pline ithin sociology. There were, to be sure, various inds of


25/65

HSTORCAL CONSTRCTON

psychology that were not postvstc for example, geisesis

senschfiche psychology and Geslpsychology.

The strongest and most inluential theorizing in psychology

that might have turned it toward dening itself as a social sci

ence, reudian theory, failed to do so for to reasons irst, it

emerged out of medical practice, and second, its initially scan-

dalous quality made it, as an activity, something of a parah

leaing psychoanalysts to create structures of institutional re-

production totally outside the university system This may have

preserved psychoanalysis as a practice and a school of thought,

but it meant that ithin the unversity reudian concepts found

their berth largely in departments other than psychology

egal studies was a third eld that never quite became a s ocial

scence or one thing, there already was a faculty of law, and its

curricula was closely linked to ts primary function of trainng

layers The nomothe}ic social scientists regarded jurispru-

dence with some skepticism It seemed too normative, too little

rooted in empirical investigaton. Its laws were not scientc

laws. ts context seemed too idiographic. Political science broke

away from analysis of such laws and their history in order to analye the abstract rules which governed political behavior, from

which it would be po ssible to derive appropriately rational egal

systems

There is one last aspect of the institutionalization of socal

scence that is important to noe. The proces s took place at the

very time that Europe was nally conrming its dominion over

the rest of the world. This gave rse tot

£

obvious question why

was this small part of the world able to fat

all rivals and m-

pose its wll on the Aericas, Africa, and Aia? This was a very


bg queston, and mos t answers to t were offered not at the leve

of the sovereign states but at the level of comparative civliza-

tions" (to which we have adverted previously) . It was Europe as

Western" civilization that had demonstrated superior produc-

tive and military prowess , not just Great Britain or rance or

Germany, whatever the sizes of their individual empires This

concern th how Europe expanded to dominate the world coin-

cided ith the Darinian intellectual transition . The seculariza-

tion of knowledge promoted by the Enlghtenment was con-

rmed by the theory of evolution, and Darinian theories

spread far beyond their biological origns lthough Netonian

physics as exemplar dominated socal science methodology,

Darnian biology had a very great inluence on social theoriz-

ing through the seemingly irresistible metaconstruct of evolu-

tion, ith a great deal of emphasis on the concept of the survival

of the ttest

The concept of the surival of the ttest was subject to much

use and abuse, and was often confused ith the concept of suc

cess through competition. loos e interpretation of evolution-

arytheory could be used to provide scientic legitimation to theassumption that progress culminated n the selfevident superi-

ority of contemporary European society: stage theories of so-

cietal development culminating in industrial civilization, hi · r i ; ,

interpretations of history, climatologcal determinism,Spen�

:

i

cerian sciology These early studies in comparative civiliza

tion were, however, not as statecentric as fully institutionalized

social science. They thus fell victim to the impact of the to

wod wars, which together undermined some of the liberal opti-

mism upon which the progressive theories of civilizations were


26/65

HSTORCA CONSTRCTON

built. Hence in the twentieth century histor anthropolog and

geography nally marginalized completely what remaned of

their earlier universalizing traditions and the statecentric trin-

it of sociolog economics and political science consolidated

their positions as the core (nomothetic) social sciences

Thus between 1850 and 1945 a series o disciplines came to

be dened as constituting an arena of nowledge to which the

name social science" was accorded. This was done by establish-

ing in the principal universities rst chairs then departments

oering courses leading to degrees in the discipline . The institu-

tionalization of training was accompanied by the institutional-

ization of research: the creation ofjournals specialized in each of

the disciplines; the construction of associations of scholars

along disciplinary lines (rst national then international) ; the

creation oflibrary collections cataloged by disciplines

An essential element in this process of institutionalizing the

disciplines was the effort by each of them to dene what distin-

guished each from the other especially what dfferentiated each

from those that seemed closest in content in the study of social

realities Beginning ith Leopold von Ranke Barthold Niebuhrand Johann Droysen historians asserted their special relation-

ship to a special tpe of materials especially archival sorces

and similar texts They stressed thatthey were interested in re-

constructing past realit by relating it to the cultural needs of the

present in an interpretative and hermeneutic ay insisting on

studing phenomena even the most complex ones like whole

cultures or nations as individualitiesa

d

as moments ( or parts)

of diachronic and synchroniccontexts

·

Anthropologists reconstructed modes of social organization


of peoples that were quite dfferent om the Western forms.

They demonstrated that customs strange to Western eyes were

not irrational but functioned to preserve and reproduce popula-

tions. Orientalist scolars studied explicated and translated

the texts of nonWestern high" civilizations and were instru-

mental in legtimating the concept of world religions" which

was a break with Christo centric views.

Most of the nomothetic social sciences stressed rst what df-

ferentiated them from the historical discipline: an interest in ar-

riving at general laws that were presumed to govern human be-

havior a readiness to perceive the phenomena to be studied as

case s (not individualities) the need to segmentalize human real-

it in order to analyze it the possibilit and desirabilit of strict

scientic methods (such as theoryrelated formulation of hy-

potheses to tested against evidence v strict and if possible

quantitative procedures) a preference for systematically pro-

duced evidence (e g survey data) and controlled observations

over received texts and other residuals

Once social science was distingished in this way from idio-

graphic histor the nomothetic social scientistseconomistspolit ical scientists and sociologists were also anxious to stake

out their separate terrains as essentially dfferent one om the

other (both in subject matter and in methodolog )

did this by insisting on the validit of a ceter paribus

tion in studying market operations Political scientists did it

restricting their concerns to formal governmental structures

Sociologists did it by insisting on an emergent social terrain ig

nored by the economists and the political scientists.

Al this it may be said was largely a success story The estab


27/65

2 STRCAL CONSTRUCTON

lishment of the disciplinary structures created able, produc-

tive structures of research, analysis, and training, which gave

birth to the considerable literature that today we consider the

heritage of contemporary social science. By 1945, the panoply of

disciplines comprising the social sciences was basically institu-

tionalized in most of the major universities of the world There

had been resistance to (indeed, often refusal of) these classica-

tions in the fascist and communist countries. With the end of

the Second World War, German and Italian institutions fell into

line fully th the accepted pattern, and the Soietbloc coun-

tries did so by the late 1950' s. urthermore, by 1945 the social

sciences were clearly distinguished on the one hand from the

natural sciences, which studied nonhuman systems, and on the

other from the humanities, which studied the cultural, mental,

and spiritual production of civilzed" human societies.

ter the Second Wrld War, however, at the very moment

when the institutional structures of the social sciences seemed

for the r st time fully in place and clearly delineated, the prac-

tices of social scientists began to change. This was to create a

gap, one that wold grow, beteen the practices and intellectualpoitions of social scientists on the one side and the formal orga-

nization of the social sciences on the other

Debates Within the

Social Sciences� 1945

to the Present

Discipes costitute a system o cotro i theproductio o dscourse, its mits throuh the

actio o a ietit taki the orm o a permaetreactivatio o the rues.

Miche Foucaut

Three developments after 1945 profoundly affectedthe structure of the social sciences that had been put into place

in the preceding hundred years. The rst was the change in

the world political sructure The United States emerged from

the Second World War th overwhelming economic strengh,

ithin a world that was p olitically dened by to new geopoliti-

cal realities: the socalled cold war beteen the United Statesand the US.S.R, and the historical reassertion of the non-

uropean peoples of the world The second development was

the fact that, in the tentve years folloing 1945, the worl

had the largest expansion of its productive capacit and popul

tion that it had ever known, one that involved an expansion in

scale of all human actities The third was the consequent extra-

ordinary quantitative and geographic expansion of the univer

. Miche Foucaut, The Arch aeo logy ofKnowledge and the Discourseon Language (New York Patheo, 92), p. 22


28/65

34 DEBATES WTHN THE SOCA SCENCES

sit system everwhere in the world, which led to a multipli-

cation of the numbers of professional social scientists. ach of

these three new social realities posed a problem for the social

sciences, as they had been historically institutionalized.

The enormous strenh of the U.S. visvis all other states af-

fected profoundly the denition of what were the most urent

issues to be adressed, and what were the most suitable ways

of addressin them. The overwhelmin economic advantae of

the U . S. in the fteen to twentve years folloin the Second

World Warmeantthat, for a while at least , social scientic activ-

it was located primarily within U.S. institutions to an unusual

deree, and this of course affected how priorities were dened

by social scientists. On the other hand, the political reassertion

of the nonuropean peoples meant that many assumptions of

social science would be called into question on the rounds that

they relected the politcal biases of an era which was now over,

or at least endin.

The rnaway expansion of the universit system worldide

had avery specic oranizational implication. It created a struc-

tural pressure for increased specialization simply because schol-ars were in search of niches that could dene their oriinalit or

at least their social utilit The most immediate effect was to en-

courae reciprocal intrusions by social scientists into neihbor-

in disciplinary domains, inorin in the process the various le

itimations that each of the social sciences had erected to justi

their specicities as reserved realms . And the economic expan-

sion fueled this specialization by p 'n the resources that

made it possible.

There was a second oranizational implication. The world

1945 TO THE PRESENT 35

economic expansion involved a quantum leap in scale for the

state machineries and for the economic enterprises, to be sure,

but also for the oranizations of research. The major powers,

larely stimulated by the cold war, bean to invest in bi science,

and this investment was extended to the social sciences. The

percentae allocated to the social sciences was small , but the ab-

solute ures were very hih in relation to anyhin that had

previously been available. This economic input encouraed a

further, fuller scientization of the social sciences . The result was

the emerence of centralized poles of scientic development

ith a concentration of information and sll, ith nancial re-

sources thatwere provided primarily by the U. S. andother major

states, by foundations (larely U.S based) , but also, to a le sser

extent, by transnational corporations

herever the institutional structurin of the social sciences

was incomplete, U.S. scholars and institutions encouraed, di

rectly and indirectly, folloin the established model, ith par-

ticular emphasis on the more nomothetic tendencies ithin the

social sciences. The massive public and private investment in

scientic research ave these poles of scientic development anunquestionable advantae over orientations that seemed less

riorous and polic oriented Thus, th e economic expansion re

inforced the worldide leitimation ithin social science

scientic paradims that underlay the technoloical

ments behind it t the same time, however, the endin of

political dominion of the Western world over the rest of the

world meant that new voices were enterin the scene not only of

politics but also of social science.

We shall discuss the conseuences of these chanes in the


29/65

DEBATES WTHN THE SOCA SCENCES

world for three successive issues: the validit of the distinc-

tions among the social sciences; ) the degree to which the heri-

tage is parochial; ( 3 ) the utilit and realit of the distinction be-

teen the to cultures ."

The Validity of the Distinctions

mong the Socil Sciences

There were three clear lines of cleavage in the system of disci-

plines erected to structure the social sciences in the late nine-

teenth century: the line beteen the study of the modern/ civi-

lized world (history plus the three nomothetic social sciences)

and the study of the nonmodern world (anthropolog, pus Ori-

ental studies ); ithin the study of the modern world , the line be-

teen the past (history) and the present (the nomothetic social

sciences ) ; ithin the nomothetic social sciences , the sharp lines

beteen the study ofthe market (economics ) , the state (political

science), and civil socie (sociolog). ach of these lines of

cleavage came to be challenged in the post1945 world.

Probably the most notable academic innovation after 1945

was the creation of area studies as a new institutional category toroup intellectual work. This concept rst emerged in the

United States during the Second World War. It was widelyiple-

mened in the United States in the ten years folloing the end

of the war, and it subsequently spread to universities other

parts of the world. The basic idea of area studies was very simple.

A area was a large geographic zone which had some supposed

cultural, historic, and ofteniu s heene The list as it

emerged was very heterodox in haracte: the U.S.S.R. China

(or ast sia), Latin merica, the Middle ast, rica South


sia, Southeast sia, astCentral urope, and, much later,

Western urope as well. In some countries, the United States ( or

North America) also became the object of area studies. Not

every universiy adopted exactly these geographic categorie s, of

course. There were many variations .

Area studies was suppose d to be an arena ofboth scholarship

and pedagog, one which brought together all those perso ns

primarily from the various social sciences , but often om the

humanities as well, and occas ionally even from some natural sci-

ences on the bas is of a shared interest in doing work in their

discipline about the given area" (or a part of it) . Area studies

was by denition multidisciplinary." The political motivations

underling its origins were quite explicit. The United States,

given its worldwide political role , needed owledge about, and

therefore specialists on, the current realities of these various re-

gions, especially since these regions were now becoming so po-

litically active. Aea studies programs were designed to train

such specialists, as were subsequent parallel programs rst in

the U.S.S.R. and in western urope, and then in many other

parts of the world (e.g., Japan, India, ustralia, and variousLatin Aerican countries) .

rea studies brought within a single structure (at least for

part of their intellectual ife) persons whose disciplinary H , _

tions cut acros s the three cleavages we have mentioned: the his

torians and nomothetic social scientists found themselves face

to face with the anthropologists and the Orientalist scholars, the

historians face to face ith the nomothetic social scientists, and

each tpe of nomothetic s ocial scientist ith the others. In addi-

tion, there were occasionally geographers, art historians, stu


30/65

DEBATES WTHN THE SOCAL SCENCES

dents of national literatures, epidemiologists, even geologists.

These people constructed curricula together, sat o n the doctoral

committees of each other's students, attended conferences of

area specalists, read each other's books, and published in new

transdisciplinary journals specializing in the areas.

hatever the intellectual value of this cros sfertilization , the

organizational consequences for the social sciences were im-

mense. Although area studies was presented in the restricted

guise of multidisciplinarit (a concept that had already been un-

der discussion the interwar period) , its practice exposed the

fact that there was considerable articialit in the sharp institu-

tiona separations of social science knowledge. Historians and

nomothetic social scientists were for the rst time ( at least in any

numbers) engaging in the study of nonWestern areas. This in-

trusion into the nonWestern world of disciplines preiousy ori-

ented to the study ofte Western world undermined the logic of

the previous arguments justiing separate arenas calledethnog-

raphy and Oriental studies . It seemed to imply that the methods

and the models of history and the nomothetic social scienes

were applicable to nonWestern regions as well as to urope andNorth America. Within to decades, anthropologists began to

renounce ethnography as their dening activit, seeing alter-

native justications for their eld. Orientalist scholars went fur-

ther; they surrendered their very name, merging themselves

variously into departments of history, philosophy, classics, and

religion, as well as into newly created departments of regional

cultural studies that covered nem cultural production

as well as the texts Orientalist scholars ha traditionally studied.


Area studies aected the structure of the departments of his-

tory and the three nomothetic social sciences as well. By the

1960' s, a signicant number of members of the facult of these

departments had become committed to doing their empirical

work on nonWestern areas of the world. The percentage was

largest in history, smallest in economics, wth political science

and sociolog somewhere in beteen. This meant that internal

discussions within these disciplines were ineitably affected by

the fact that the data they were debating, the courses they were

asing students to take, and the subjects of legitimate resech

had become considerablyider in geographical terms. When we

add to this geographic expansion of the subject matter the geo-

graphic expansion of the source of recruitment of the scholars,

the social situation ithin the intitutions of knowledge may be

said to have undergone a signicant evolution in the post945

period.

The disintegration of the intellectual segregation beteen

the study of Western and nonWestern areas po sed a fundamen

tal intellectual question , with some larger political implications.

Were the to zones ontologically identical o r dierent? Th e pre-dominant preious assumption had been that they were suf-

ciently different that they required dfferent social science disci-

plines to study them. Was one now to make the opposite assump

tion, that there was no dfference of any ind that would warran

some special form of analysis for the nonWestern world? The

nomothetic social scientists debated whether the generaliza-

tions (laws) that they had been establishing were equally applic-

able to the study of nonWestern areas. or more idiographic

;. iJ


31/65


historians, the debate was posed as the question, one that was

seriously asked: does rica have a history? or do n y historic

nations" have histories?

The intellectual response to these queries was es sentially an

uncertain compromise. It might be summarized as the argu-

ment that nonWestern areas were analyically the same as West-

ern areas but not quite The primary form that this argument

took was modernization theory. It of course built on many dis-

cussions and premises (explicit and implicit) in the earlier so-

cial science literature, but nonetheles s modernization literature

too a particular form and became very important in social sci-

ence theorizing. The key thesis was that there exists a common

modernizing path of nations/peoples/areas (hence they were

the same ) but that nations/peoples/areas nd themselves at f-

ferent stages on this path (hence they were not quite the same ) .

In terms ofpublic polcy, this was translated into a worldide

concern ith development," a term that was dened as the

process by which a country advanced along the universal path of

modernization. Organizationally, the concern with moderniza-

tion/development tended to bring the multiple social sciencestogether in common projects, and in a common stance visvis

public authorities The political commitment of the states to de-

velopment became one of the great justications for expending

public funds on research by social scientists.

Mo dernization/development had the characteristic that this

model could be applied to Western zones as well, by interpreting

the historical development of theW

world as the progres-

sive and precocious achievement of men zat on This pro-

vided a basis on which the previously presentoriented nomo


thetic social scientists began to nd a justication for using data

that were not contemporary, despite the factthat such data were

more incomplete, whie historians began to consider whether

some of the generalizations put forth by nom othetic social scien-

tists might not help to elucidate their understanding ( even their

hermeneutic understanding) of the past. The attempt to bridge

the gap beteen idiographic history and nomothetic social sci-

ence did not begin in 1945. It has an earlier trajectory. The move-

ment called new history" in the United States in the earlyten-

tieth century and the movements in rance (Annaes and its pre-

deces sors) were explictly such attempts. However, only in the

post1945 period did such attempts begin to attract substantial

support among historians.

Indeed, it was only in the 1960' s that the quest for close coop-

eration and even mixing beteen (parts of) history and (parts of)

the social sciences became a very noticeable and noted phenom-

enon. In history, the conviction gained some ground that the

received prole of the discipline no longer fully served modern

needs . Historians had been better in studing past politics than

past social and economic life. Histoical studies had tended toconcentrate on events , and on the moties of individuals and in-

stitutions , and they had been les s well equipped for analyzing

the more anonymous processes and structures that were.vaLCU

in the ongue dure Structures and processes seemed to

been neglected. All this was to be changed by broadening the

scope of historical studies: by adding more economic and social

history, in its on right, and as a keyto understanding history in

general.

undamental changes in the discipline of history were advo


32/65


cated ith the help of the neighboring social sciences. The so-

cial sciences had tools to offer in the study of dimensions of the

past that were beneath" or behind" historical institutions

events and ideas (dimensions such as economic change popula-

tion growh social inequali and mobili mass attitudes and

behavior social protest and voting patterns) tool s that the his-

torians did not posses s: quantitative methods; analyic concepts

lie class role expectations or status dscrepancy; models of

social change Some historians sought now to use such mass

data" as marriage registers election results and tax documents

and for this the turn to the social sciences proved indispensable.

history (and anthropolog) became more open to quanti-

tative research there was a process of circular reinforcement:

money numbers of scholars and social legitimacy all fed each

other and strengthened the sense of selfcondence in the intel-

lectual warran of the conceptual constructs of social science.

Sometimes the quest for change in the discipline of history

went hand in hand ith a desire to engage in social and cultural

criticism It was argued that the historians had overstressed con-

sensus and the fnctioning of institutions and had underesti-mated conlict deprivation and inequalities of class ethnicit

and gender. Criticism of the received paradigms combine with

challenges to established authorities inside and outside the pro-

fesion. Sometimes as in Germany such a revisionist mood re-

inforced the turn of historians toward the social sciences. Using

analyical concepts and theoretical approaches was in itself

a way of expressing opposition to

paradigm which stressed hemene pah and lan

guage as close to the sources as possi ble. Some social science tra


ditions see med to o er specic tools for developing a critical"

history or rather a critical historical socia science" But in

other countries like the US. which not only had other less

historicist" traditions in history bu t also a les s critical tradition

in the social sciences radcal reisionist historians felt less at-

tracted by social science approaches .

Economics sociolog and political science lourished in the

postwar period in part basing in the relection of the glories of

the natural sciences and their high prestige and inluence were

another reason why many historians found it interesting to draw

on their wor. At the same time some social scientists were be-

ginning to move into realms previously reserved to t he histori-

ans. This expansion of the nomothetic social sciences into his-

tory too however two quite dfferent forms On the one hand

there was the a pplication of relatively specic and narrow social

science theories models and procedures to data about the past

(s ometimes even from the past ) for example studies on voting

patterns social mobili and economc growh. Such data were

treated like other variables or indicators in the empirical social

sciences that is they were standadized (in time series) iso-lated and correated. This was sometimes called social science

history." These social scientists were expanding the loci from

which they drew their data but they did no t thinki t necessary

desirable to change their procedures in any way; they

did not become traditiona historians. Most of them neither ex-

pected nor found much that was dfferent about the past. Data

about the past seemed ather to corroborate or at most modi

slightly the general laws in which they were basically interested

Still sometimes the results of such work became very important


33/65

44 DEBATES WTHN THE SOCAL SCENCES

for hisorians and conriued o a eer undersanding on heir

par of he pas.

There was however a quie dieren ur owrd hisory on

he p of some oher socia scieniss hose who were iner-

esed in descriing and expaining argescae socia change

someimes in a Weerian someimes in a Marxian radiion of-

en somewhere in eeen. They produced various pes ofwha

came o e ced hisorica socioog" They were criica of

he ahisoricism of heir coeague s who hey fe had os ouch

ih many of he es earier adiions in he socia sciences.

The work hey did was es s scienisic" and more hisoricis."

They ook specic hisorica conexs s eriousy and paced socia

change ino he cener of he sory hey od Their works did no

aim primariy a esing modiing and formuaing aws (for

exampe of moderniaion u raher used genera rues o ex-

pain compex and chging phenomena or inerpre hem in

he igh of hose genera paerns. In he 1960'S, his criicism

of ahisoricism ega n o e increasingy expressed y younger

socia scieniss as hey rned o socia criicism. Their crii-

cism of mainsream" socia sciences incuded he asserionha hey had negeced he cenai of socia change favoring

a mhoogy of consens us and ha hey showed a naive even ar-

rogan sefassuredness in apping Wesern conceps o he

anaysis of very ifferen phenomena and cures

In he case of socia science hi sory" socia scieniss were

moving oward hisory as a conseq uence of he ogic and he ex-

pansive dnamics of heir lne.'hey were seeking ess o

ridge he gap" ih hisory han o 61 e arger daa ases

This was no rue of he hisorica socioogiss" who se work in


voved a criique of prevaiing mehodooges. A simiar moive

was a pay among many of he hisorians who were caing for

he use of socia scienc echniques and generaiaions. There

was a convergence of he riings of he hisorica (or hisorici-

ing socia scieniss ih hose of he srucurais" hisorians

which seem ed o hi is sride in he 1970s ahough here usu-

ay si remaned cerain differences in se: proximi o he

sources eve of generaiaion he degree of narraive presen-

aion and even foonoing echniques

This move oward a coser cooperaion eeen hisory and

he oher socia sciences remained noneheess a minori phe-

nomenon Furhermore in addiion o he hisorysocioog dis-

cussion here seemed o e separae ones eeen hisory and

each of he oher socia sciences: economics ( eg. he new eco-

nomic hisory" poiica science (e .g. he new insiuiona-

ism " anhropoog (hisorica anhropoog" and geogra-

phy (hisorica geography" In a of hese eds some of his

convergence came aou in he form of simpe expansion of he

daa domain of a paricuar socia science radiion and s ome o f

i ook he form of he reopening of fundamena mehodoogi-ca issues

The groing overap among he hree radiiona nomoheic

socia scienceseconomics poiica science and v nV'

was es s charged wih conoversy The socioogiss ed he way

mkng oh poiica socioog" nd economic socioog"

ino imporan and sandard su eds wihin he discipine as

ery as he 1950'S The poiica scieniss foowed sui They

expanded heir concerns eyond forma governmena insiu-

ons redening heir suec maer o incde a socia pro


34/65

DE ATES WTHN THE SOCAL SCENCES

cesses that had political implications or intentions: the study of

pressure groups protest movements communit organiza tions

nd when some critical social scientists reived the use of the

term political econo my" other less critical political scientists

responded by tring to give the term and the subject matter a

more classically nomothetic lavor. The common result how-

ever was to engage the political scientists in a fuller concern

with economic proces ses . For the economists the early postar

dominance of Keynesian ideas reved concern ith macroeco-

nomic s " whereupon the diiding line ith political science be-

came le ss clear since the object of analysis was largely the poli-

cies of governments and intergovernmental agencies . Later on

some nonKeesian economists began to argue the merits of

using neoclassical economic analytic models for the study of

subjects traditionally considered sociological such as the family

or social deance.

l three disciplines were increasing the degree of their

commitment to quantitative techniques and even mathematical

modeling in the early postar years; as a result the distinctive-

ness of their methodological approaches seemed to diminishhen social criticism began to fuel the internal debates of these

disciplines the limitations that the critical social scientsts in

each discipline found in the positiist doctrines prevailing in

their discipline seemed about the same in each. Once again

there is no point in exaggerating. Organizationally the three dis-

ciplines remained quite distinct and there was no lack of voices

to defend this separation. owever the years in the case of

both the mainstream and the critical ns of each there be-

gan to be in practice an increasing overlap in subject matter and

methodolog among the three nomothetic disciplines.

95 TO THE PRESENT 7

The multiple overlaps beteen the disciplines had a double

consequence . Not only did it beco me less and less simple to nd

clear distinguishing lines beteen them in terms of either the

domain of concern or the ways in which the data were treated

but each discipline also became more and more heterogeneous

because of stretching the boundaries of acceptable subjects of

inquiry. This led to considerable internal questioning about the

coherence of the disciplines and the legitimacy of the intellec-

tual premises each had used to argue for its right to a se parate

existence. One way of handling this was the attempt to create

new interdisciplinary" names like communications stuies

administrative sciences and behaioral sciences .

Many consider the groing emphasis on multidisciplinarit

as the expression of a lexible respo nse by the s ocial sciences to

problems encountered and intellectual objections raised to the

structuring of the disciplines. They feel that the convergence of

parts of the social sciences and parts of history toward a more

comprehensive so cial science has been a creative approach that

has involved a fruitful cross fertilization and deserves to be fur-

ther advanced and developed. Others feel less sanguine aboutwhat has been achieved They believe tat the concession of

interdisciplinarit" has served as much to salvage the legiti-

macy of the existing disciplines as to overcome the waning

of their distinctiveness The latter have urged a more radical

construction to overcome what they perceive as intelectual

confusion.

However one appreciates the very clear trend to the theme of

multidisciplinarit the organizational consequences seem evi-

dent. hereas the number of names used to classi social sci-

ence knowledge actiit had been steadily reduced beteen 850


35/65

DEATES WTHN THE SO CAL SCENCES

and 195 ending up ith a relatively small list of accepted

names fo

Date post:	07-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	rbfrbfrbf
View:	240 times
Download:	1 times

Wallerstein - Open the Social Sciences.pdf

Documents