100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Previously searched by you
Previously searched by you
logo
Theory III - summary lectures 1-7 £5.66
Add to cart
Quickly navigate to
Preview
  2.  
  3. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen (RuG)
  4.  
  5. Theory III (LGX299B05)

Lecture notes

Theory III - summary lectures 1-7
 0 purchase
  • Module
  • Theory III (LGX299B05)
  • Institution
  • Rijksuniversiteit Groningen (RuG)

A concise overview of all seven lectures, with all thinkers and concepts included. For some thinkers a little more information with citations included. Please note that Bruno Latour and Spiegel are missing from the summary, but everything else is included.

Preview 3 out of 30  pages

Document information

  • April 4, 2024
  • 30
  • 2022/2023
  • Lecture notes
  • Dr. peters, dr. hellemans, dr. krol
  • All classes

Subjects

  • collingwood
  • hempel
  • wittgenstein
  • induction
  • abduction
  • ginzburg
  • structure
  • agency
  • liberalism
  • determinism
  • positivism
  • language
  • cavell
  • narrativism
  • dilthey
  • idealism
  • realism
  • hayden white
  • mentality
  • braudel
  • appa

Written for

  • Rijksuniversiteit Groningen (RuG)
  • Geschiedenis
  • Theory III (LGX299B05)
All documents for this subject (3)

Seller

avatar-seller
klstrmn

Reviews received

Content preview

Theory III: Theory of History in practice
Summary lectures 1 - 7 (2023)

Lecture 1 (08-02): Critical thinking and Theory
History and Rhetorics
The goal: “Helping historians to detect, analyse, and critically evaluate the underlying
assumptions of historical research and writing.”

History is often compared to a never ending discussion (P. Geijl):
- Historical arguments are often long, complex, broad and deep.
- It’s difficult to analyse a story, because it contains tacit assumptions and premises etc.
about time, nature, ethics…
- Because there are no universally valid premises, the interpretations don’t necessarily
follow from the evidence; there are multiple interpretations possible.
- Interpretations are based on non-strict forms of reasoning, which can involve for
example essentially contested concepts.
- Historical interpretations are inferences to the best explanation
- Concepts, reasonings, information, etc. can be challenged any time.
Discussions are essential for historians: “one answer is the end of freedom”

Reverse engineering: exposing the underlying assumptions based on the interpretation by
asking the four questions:
1. Nature - what is history?
2. Object - what is it about?
3. Method - how does it proceed?
4. Aim - what is it for?
Examples of underlying assumptions are: Tychè, Fortuna, divine providence, human action,
general laws, idealism and realism.

Science versus rethorics
There are four main differences between the scientist and the rhetorician:
1. Scientists are observers, while rhetoricians are active participants.
2. Scientists study human actions in the past, while rhetoricians concern themselves with
human action in the present.
This means that the rhetoricians are motivated by problems in the present to
write and study history and are aiming to solve the contemporary problems with
wisdom of the past.
Meanwhile, the scientist wants distance to retain objectivity - therefore, the
subject cannot be too recent.

, 3. Scientists use logic and avoid fallacy and ambiguity; rhetoricians use persuasiveness
to convince the audience.
4. Scientists aim to establish truth or fact, the rhetoricians aim to convince their
audience.
Where are the limits of these two disciplines? Where does one end and the other start?



Historical Reasoning
There are three types of reasoning that are applied in the study of history: deduction,
induction and abduction.

Deduction: the premises are true, therefore the conclusion is true.
Induction: from the particular to the general.
Abduction: hypotheses, or inference to the best explanation.
Only deduction can be logically valid, in- and abduction are never completely certain.

Ginzburg’s article teaches us that the ‘clues’, or, the smaller parts of information, can tell us
more than the whole. If we analyse those clues using the types of historical reasoning and our
imagination, we are able to gather knowledge.
In Ginzburg’s article, Morelli, Freud and Holmes all inspected and analysed details
that no one else previously considered to be helpful to come to an answer or conclusion.

Abduction in historical reasoning takes the following form:
P1: The surprising information ‘I’ has been observed (e.g. a roman coin, the shape of an ear,
the dog did not bark)
P2: If hypothesis ‘H’ were true, ‘I’ would follow…
C: probably ‘H’ is true.

We have to critically distinguish between the most loveable inference and the most likely
inference to get to the best explanation. To arrive at the best explanation, you need to
compare the most plausible hypotheses based on the available information at that moment.
Keep in mind that inferences are never completely certain! There can always be a
more accurate or better explanation or hypothesis.

There are however two ‘tricky’ (read: fallacious) types of inferences: affirming the
consequent and denial of the antecedent.
Affirming the consequent: the second premise affirms the consequence of the first
premise, which risks exclusion of other (possibly better) conclusions and premises.

This takes the logical form of:
P1: if p then q
P2: q
C: p

, This inference would only be valid if the first premise consists of a law without
exceptions. But, in writing and analysing history, there are no such laws, which means this
kind of inference cannot be made.
It would therefore be best to compare multiple hypotheses and choose the most
plausible law instead of basing the argument on a rule.

Denial of the antecedent: if there is no evidence, it has not happened.This excludes
other causes for the consequence/hypotheses or assumes that something is not the case, while
it actually might be.

This takes the logical form of:
P1: if p then q
P2: not q
C: not p
“Historians cannot escape the ‘negative proof’; if they claim on the basis of
information that something has been the case, they assume that there is no argument against
the hypothesis.”

The rule of inference can be used to find (hidden) assumptions in reasoning. In the case of an
abduction/inference to the best explanation, the assumption connects the standpoint to the
argument.
An example would be: ‘The doorbell rings, that must be Pete’ which contains the rule
of inference that ‘every time the doorbell rings, it is Pete’.

Essentially Contested Concepts (ECC’s): a term coined by Gallie, which refers to concepts
about which there is always an inevitable dispute about its proper use.
If there is no consensus on its proper use, there is automatically also no consensus on
its proper meaning. For some kind of solution we can look at Wittgenstein: the meaning of a
word depends on its lingual context, and we can use historical analysis on language to at least
gain some understanding of the dispute and the concept in question.

Julia Galef made the distinction between the ‘soldier mindset’ and the ‘scout mindset’. In
history writing, it is best to take on the ‘scout mindset’, which entails asking whether the
picture fits the evidence (instead of the other way around), revising your reasoning when new
information is found to make it more accurate and to be self-critical.

It is important to be able to detect a fallacy. Van Eemerens new definition is: “incorrect
moves in a discussion for which the goal is successful resolution of a dispute.”

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller klstrmn. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for £5.66. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

65040 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 15 years now

Start selling

Recently viewed by you

Summary ·

(0)

Samenvatting Handboek Requirements H14

Summary ·

(0)

Samenvatting - Private veiligheid

Summary ·

(3)

Samenvatting lessen accountancy

Summary ·

(0)

Digestion a level summary notes

Summary ·

(0)

Begrippenlijst - HRM overview OP4

Exam (elaborations) ·

(0)

NCLEX QUESTIONS: NURSING PROCESS

Summary ·

(0)

SAMENVATTING TEKSTEN kunstmarkt

Lecture notes ·

(0)

Macro Economics - Monetary Policy

Package deal ·

(0)

Criminal Law (Bar) Package Deal

£5.66
  • (0)
Add to cart
Added