Is history a science?

Philosophy and Literature 29 (2):477-488 (2005)
An odd, but persistent question. In _Guns, Steel and Germs, Jared Diamond's answer is that history is or should be a science. Like sociobiologists and evolutionary psychologists, he wants to extend the methods of the natural sciences to the social sciences and the humanities. My answer is an emphatic 'no!' E. H. Carr's _What is History? made an extended case for scientific history. The main burden of my essay is a dismantling of Carr's argument. Concerned with objective truth (_pace the radical skeptics), history writing may have science in its tool kit. But it is essentially an interpretive, narrative art
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1353/phl.2005.0024
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
Edit this record
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Mark as duplicate
Request removal from index
Revision history
Download options
Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 31,334
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Added to PP index

Total downloads
257 ( #15,672 of 2,225,225 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #93,481 of 2,225,225 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads
My notes
Sign in to use this feature