Historians make practically no use of new intellectual tools from the social sciences that are revolutionizing fields such as law or political science, even though the tools lend themselves to the study of the past. True, they may not suit every historian, but why should we forsake methodological assistance that can broaden our perception of the past and help us decide what is important
Also CSST Working Paper #59.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/51216/1/449.pd
The article deals with the problem of whether history can be treated as a part of the social science...
The article confronts methodological differences between (and among) social psychologists and histor...
This paper argues that the promotion of social science influence in policy-making has strangely negl...
The claim that historians “write from a present-day perspective” does not entail that the past only ...
We historians know less than we should about internal differentiation among the social sciences. Wha...
History is different from the other social sciences. Nine contrasting qualities have produced a str...
The famous gulf between the arts and the sciences comes from the current pervasiveness of ...
Autonomy of history and historiography may rest on a claim that their method is substantially differ...
Modernity investigates and explains the past, according to its standards and expectations. Historian...
Historians and social scientists routinely, and inevitably, rely on sources that are unrepresentativ...
We live in a changing world, in which the value is changing. Historical science deals with the chang...
During the past 20 or more years change and ferment has invigorated the study of the past. New appro...
The study of history dates back to the classical times and its contributions to the development of h...
This contribution is based on four assumptions: 1) the social and political sciences should rebuild ...
Also CSST Working Paper #59.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/51216/1/449.pd
The article deals with the problem of whether history can be treated as a part of the social science...
The article confronts methodological differences between (and among) social psychologists and histor...
This paper argues that the promotion of social science influence in policy-making has strangely negl...
The claim that historians “write from a present-day perspective” does not entail that the past only ...
We historians know less than we should about internal differentiation among the social sciences. Wha...
History is different from the other social sciences. Nine contrasting qualities have produced a str...
The famous gulf between the arts and the sciences comes from the current pervasiveness of ...
Autonomy of history and historiography may rest on a claim that their method is substantially differ...
Modernity investigates and explains the past, according to its standards and expectations. Historian...
Historians and social scientists routinely, and inevitably, rely on sources that are unrepresentativ...
We live in a changing world, in which the value is changing. Historical science deals with the chang...
During the past 20 or more years change and ferment has invigorated the study of the past. New appro...
The study of history dates back to the classical times and its contributions to the development of h...
This contribution is based on four assumptions: 1) the social and political sciences should rebuild ...
Also CSST Working Paper #59.http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/51216/1/449.pd
The article deals with the problem of whether history can be treated as a part of the social science...
The article confronts methodological differences between (and among) social psychologists and histor...