Historia – nauka nomotetyczna czy idiograficzna. Pytanie o zalety i ograniczenia naturalistycznych koncepcji nauk historycznych
History: Nomothetic or Idiographic Discipline? Questioning the Advantages and Disadvantages of the Naturalistic Approach to History

Summary/Abstract: Recent developments in history’s auxiliary disciplines and the gamut of methods which can be utilized by the contemporary historian inevitably beg for a revision of the methodological and philosophical approach to the discipline of history. Nowadays, radiocarbon dating, mathematical models of the spread of disease or statistical methods of text analysis are only a few of the methods used by the natural sciences which are crucial for historians. Methodological naturalism is often a threshold to epistemological and metaphysical naturalism. Some instructive examples of the naturalistic approach to history have recently been provided by the books and papers of Jared Diamond, James A. Robinson and Edmund Russell, who not only illustrate how the natural environment (soil composition, geology, biodiversity or epidemiological hazard) can be a major civilization-forming factor, but also (in Diamond’s case) put forward the hypothesis that a crisis of civilization is often a repercussion caused by the mismanagement of the natural environment. According to Diamond this principle is applicable both to hunter-gatherers and modern societies. The scope and convincing scientific background of these analyses make it not only a methodological approach but also a thought-provoking metaphysical position. The main aim of this paper is to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of this naturalistic approach to the discipline of history and answer the question regarding history’s position among others disciplines.

• Details
• Contents