Intellectual history (also thehistory of ideas) is the study of thehistory of human thought and ofintellectuals, people whoconceptualize, discuss, write about, and concern themselves withideas. The investigative premise of intellectual history is that ideas do not develop in isolation from the thinkers who conceptualize and apply those ideas; thus the intellectual historian studies ideas in two contexts: (i) as abstract propositions for critical application; and (ii) in concrete terms of culture, life, and history.[1]
As a field of intellectual enquiry, the history of ideas emerged from the European disciplines ofKulturgeschichte (Cultural History) andGeistesgeschichte (Intellectual History) from which historians might develop a global intellectual history that shows the parallels and the interrelations in the history of critical thinking in every society.[2][3] Likewise, the history ofreading, and thehistory of the book, about the material aspects ofbook production (design, manufacture, distribution) developed from the history of ideas.
The concerns of intellectual history are the intelligentsia and the critical study of the ideas expressed in the texts produced by intellectuals; therein the difference between intellectual history from other forms ofcultural history that study visual and non-verbal forms of evidence. In the production of knowledge, the concept ofthe intellectual as a political citizen of public society dates back to the 19th century, referring to someone who is professionally engaged withcritical thinking; if their work is of notable relevance to the general public or aims to improve society, such a person is sometimes called apublic intellectual. Nonetheless, anyone who explored his or her thoughts on paper can be the subject of an intellectual history.
Intellectual history developed from thehistory of philosophy andcultural history as practiced since the times ofVoltaire (1694–1778) andJacob Burckhardt (1818–1897). The scholarly efforts of the eighteenth century can be traced toThe Advancement of Learning (1605),Francis Bacon's call for what he termed "a literary history". In economics,John Maynard Keynes (1883–1946) was both a historian of economic thought,[4] and the subject of study by historians of economic thought, because of the significance of theKeynesian Revolution.[5]
The contemporary understanding of intellectual history emerged in the immediate postwar period of the 1940s, in its earlier incarnation as "the history of ideas" under the leadership ofArthur Lovejoy, the founder of theJournal of the History of Ideas. Since that time, Lovejoy's formulation of "unit-ideas" was developed in different and divergent intellectual directions, such as contextualism, historically sensitive accounts of intellectual activity in the corresponding historical period, which investigative shift is reflected in the replacement of the term "history of ideas" with the term "intellectual history".[6]
Intellectual history is multidisciplinary and includes thehistory of philosophy and thehistory of economic thought.
In continental Europe, the pertinent example of intellectual history isBegriffsgeschichte (History of Concepts, 2010), byReinhart Koselleck. In Britain thehistory of political thought has been a particular focus since the late 1960s, and is especially associated withhistorians at Cambridge, such asJohn Dunn andQuentin Skinner, who studied European political thought in historical context, emphasizing the emergence and development of concepts such asthe State andFreedom. Skinner is known for provocative, methodological essays that give prominence to the practice of intellectual history.[7] In the United States, intellectual history encompass different forms of intellectual production, not just the history of political ideas, and includes fields such as the history of historical thought, associated withAnthony Grafton (Princeton University) andJ.G.A. Pocock (Johns Hopkins University). Formally established in 2010, the doctorate in History and Culture atDrew University is one of few graduate programs specializing in intellectual history, in the American and European contexts. Despite the pre-eminence of early modern intellectual historians (those studying the age from theRenaissance to theAge of Enlightenment), the intellectual history of the modern period also has been very productive on both shores of the Atlantic Ocean, e.g.The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America (2001), byLouis Menand andThe Dialectical Imagination: A History of the Frankfurt School and the Institute of Social Research, 1923–50 (1973), byMartin Jay.
The historianArthur O. Lovejoy (1873–1962) coined the phrasehistory of ideas[8] and initiated its systematic study[9] in the early decades of the 20th century.Johns Hopkins University was a "fertile cradle" to Lovejoy's history of ideas;[10] he worked there as a professor of history, from 1910 to 1939, and for decades he presided over the regular meetings of theHistory of Ideas Club.[11] Another outgrowth of his work is theJournal of the History of Ideas.
Aside from his students and colleagues engaged in related projects (such asRené Wellek andLeo Spitzer, with whom Lovejoy engaged in extended debates), scholars such asIsaiah Berlin,[12]Michel Foucault,Christopher Hill,J. G. A. Pocock, and others have continued to work in a spirit close to that with which Lovejoy pursued the history of ideas. The first chapter of Lovejoy's bookThe Great Chain of Being (1936) lays out a general overview of what he intended to be the programme and scope of the study of the history of ideas.[9]
In the History of Ideas, Lovejoy used theunit-idea (concept) as the basic unit of historical analysis. The unit-idea is the building block of the history of ideas; though relatively stable in itself, the unit-idea combines with other unit-ideas into new patterns of meaning in the context of different historical eras. Lovejoy said that the historian of ideas is tasked with identifying unit-ideas and with describing their historical emergence and development into new conceptual forms and combinations. The methodology of the unit-idea means to extract the basic idea from a work of philosophy and from a philosophical movement, with the investigative principles of the methodology being: (1) assumptions, (2) dialectical motives, (3) metaphysical pathos, and (4) philosophicalsemantics. The principles of methodology define the overarching philosophical movement in which the historian can find the unit-idea, which then is studied throughout the history of the particular idea.[9]
The British historianQuentin Skinner criticized Lovejoy's unit-idea methodology as a "reification of doctrines" that has negative consequences.[13] That the historian of ideas must be sensitive to the cultural context of the texts and ideas under analysis. Skinner'shistorical method is based upon the theory of speech acts, proposed byJ.L. Austin. In turn, scholars criticized Skinner's historical method because of his inclination toreify social structures and sociological constructs in place of the historical actors of the period under study. The philosopherAndreas Dorschel said that Skinner's restrictive approach to ideas, through verbal language, and notes that ideas can materialize in non-linguistic media and genres, such as music and architecture.[14] The historianDag Herbjørnsrud said that "the Skinner perspective is in danger of shutting the door to comparative philosophy, and the search for common problems and solutions across borders and time."[15]
The historianPeter Gordon said that unlike Lovejoy's practise of the History of Ideas, the praxis of Intellectual History studies and deals with ideas in broad historical contexts.[16] That unlike historians of ideas and philosophers (History of Philosophy), intellectual historians, "tend to be more relaxed about crossing the boundary between philosophical texts and non-philosophical contexts . . . [Intellectual historians regard] the distinction between 'philosophy' and 'non-philosophy' as something that is, itself, historically conditioned, rather than eternally fixed." Therefore, intellectual history is a means for reproducing a historically valid interpretation of a philosophical argument, by implementation of a context in which to study ideas and philosophical movements.[16]
Michel Foucault rejectednarrative, the historian's traditional mode of communication, because of what he believed to be the shallow treatment of facts, figures, and people in a long period, rather than deep research that shows the interconnections among the facts, figures, and people of a specific period of history.[17] Foucault said that historians should reveal historical descriptions through the use of different perspectives of the "archaeology of knowledge", whose historical method for writing history is in four ideas.
First, the archaeology of knowledge defines the period of history through philosophy, by way of the discourses amongthought,representation, and themes. Second, that the notion of discontinuity has an important role in the disciplines of history. Third, that discourse does not seek to grasp the moment in history, wherein the social and the persons under study are inverted into each other. Fourth, that Truth is not the purpose of history, but the discourse contained in history.[18]
In the 21st century, the field ofglobal intellectual history has received increased attention. In 2013,Samuel Moyn and Andrew Sartori published the anthologyGlobal Intellectual History.[19]
In 2016, the Routledge journalGlobal Intellectual History (ed.Richard Whatmore) was established.[20]J. G. A. Pocock andJohn Dunn are among those who recently have argued for a more global approach to intellectual history in contrast toEurocentrism.[21][22]
Authority control databases: National |
|---|
