You are on page 1of 8
THEORY, HISTORY, AND SOCIAL SCIENCE he goal of cis book is to initiate a serious dialogue about socal theory ove ces, The groundwork for such a understanding of the ine theo indicate what shape ould illuminate, and your common proj ‘advance only by means of free, open, and cy novel, at the beginning o dialogue between historians and soci ‘example one ofthe stated ideals of M n-questions of hiscorical che ‘Moreover est inthe snes eile Uegsk met ‘ening a return tothe golden age of our pred academic e eighteenth or eaty ni generations entists and historians have succeeded in forming dis discourse, h general laws or at least valid generaiza- id co be defined by theirtheoriesand y (bu no eae ffs ly) requited cheory or methods course, bur snasteing he theories and o Print when chey bev isbo Karl Mary, Max Weber like household nam laity oftheir subject matter—for example from contemporary sources —than with discussions interpretation.’ The same difference shows up in is common for ns to be advertised ae sociolog- ical theory, but I have never seen ajob vuntless famous social sie basis of work in cheory, bur i @ handful of historians whose eminence arose from bates. When historians borrow socialctheoretcal concepts we often find epts don‘ quite fitathat they need tbe adjusted. nuanced, or mbined with concepts from othe, apparent incomparible, theoretical discourses in order tobe useful in historical research. Jn this sense, our use y of California, Santa Cruz hac makes chem ungainly for hiscorian who jean ‘orto propose new vocabularies or concep ck LaCapra,an intellectual historian raty theory, or William Reddy, who ‘work on the social and historical sig- Chakarabarty, who is a major “post ly rose co prominence on the basis of more em- nificance of emotions; or Dipes

You might also like