Historia@Teoria
Not a member yet
95 research outputs found
Sort by
W ZWIĄZKU Z TEKSTEM JANA POMORSKIEGO Polityzacja/mitologizacja historii, czyli w czym neuronauka (i metodologia) może pomóc badaczowi historii najnowszej?
Full text linkThe article discusses some highlighted premises and main postulates expounded in the essay by Pomorski. The outlook of the polemics is based on the culturological epistemology of history therefore the concept of politicization/mythologization and historiography inspired by neuroscience is called into the question in particular. Cognitive approach in humanities is also discussed, nevertheless the idea of humanistic cognitive science as the new refl ection on the human ways of the acquiring of culture might be taken into consideration.The article discusses some highlighted premises and main postulates expounded in the essay by Pomorski. The outlook of the polemics is based on the culturological epistemology of history therefore the concept of politicization/mythologization and historiography inspired by neuroscience is called into the question in particular. Cognitive approach in humanities is also discussed, nevertheless the idea of humanistic cognitive science as the new refl ection on the human ways of the acquiring of culture might be taken into consideration
HISTORIA NAJNOWSZA - POMIĘDZY PEWNOŚCIĄ A ZWĄTPIENIEM?
Full text linkThe paper discuss the regulatory principles which might be included into discussion on the controversy over the uses and misuses of contemporary history in Poland. The main proposals are as follow. We need greater methodological awareness that sources we are using whilst describing and interpreting the history are not refl ecting the whole past (which is simply impossible). While observing divergent versions of reconstructed past one should notice that the most divergent matt ers are connected with ethics. Three levels of ethics and moral judgments are listed: professional ethic of historian (is he a judge or observer), ethics/moral judgments of the past we investigate, moral judgment about the past. However tempting, metaphorical use of language should be limited at least at this stage of controversy, for there are not a commonly agreed set of metaphors, thus their use might only complicate the exchange of opinions.The paper discuss the regulatory principles which might be included into discussion on the controversy over the uses and misuses of contemporary history in Poland. The main proposals are as follow. We need greater methodological awareness that sources we are using whilst describing and interpreting the history are not refl ecting the whole past (which is simply impossible). While observing divergent versions of reconstructed past one should notice that the most divergent matt ers are connected with ethics. Three levels of ethics and moral judgments are listed: professional ethic of historian (is he a judge or observer), ethics/moral judgments of the past we investigate, moral judgment about the past. However tempting, metaphorical use of language should be limited at least at this stage of controversy, for there are not a commonly agreed set of metaphors, thus their use might only complicate the exchange of opinions
HISTORYK WE WSPÓŁCZESNYM ŚWIECIE. KILKA UWAG WOKÓŁ TEKSTU JANA POMORSKIEGO Polityzacja/mitologizacja historii, czyli w czym neuronauka (i metodologia) może pomóc badaczowi historii najnowszej?
Full text linkRegarding how the present historians get involved in the debate on the politicization of the contemporary history, we can observe a superannuation of two models of historian: as a „cool scientist” and an „upholder of national values”. Apparently we could postulate in this moment the model of a historian as “a translator and mediator” between cultures, recognizing their “grammars”, and his obligation to create the common social capital. Nevertheless the scientifi c refl ection upon the politicization of history and the methodology of contemporary historiography is the matt er in dispute. Th erefore Pomorski’s suggestion of the more complex cognitive approach in the historiographical research (and historical discourse) should be taken into consideration.Regarding how the present historians get involved in the debate on the politicization of the contemporary history, we can observe a superannuation of two models of historian: as a „cool scientist” and an „upholder of national values”. Apparently we could postulate in this moment the model of a historian as “a translator and mediator” between cultures, recognizing their “grammars”, and his obligation to create the common social capital. Nevertheless the scientifi c refl ection upon the politicization of history and the methodology of contemporary historiography is the matt er in dispute. Th erefore Pomorski’s suggestion of the more complex cognitive approach in the historiographical research (and historical discourse) should be taken into consideration
DYLEMATY POLSKICH HISTORYKÓW A.D. 2017 (RAZ JESZCZE O POLITYZACJI/ Y- MITOLOGIZACJI HISTORII) - REPLIKA
Full text linkDYLEMATY POLSKICH HISTORYKÓW A.D. 2017 (RAZ JESZCZE O POLITYZACJI/Y- MITOLOGIZACJI HISTORII) - REPLIK
POLITYZACJA/MITOLOGIZACJA HISTORII, CZYLI W CZYM NEURONAUKA (I METODOLOGIA) MOŻE POMÓC BADACZOWI HISTORII NAJNOWSZEJ?
Full text linkThe narratives created by historians with respect to events of the past serve not only the cognitive aims, but may also be used in the current discourse of power and as such be referred to as ‘historical politics’. In such cases the spotlight is no longer on the historical truth, but rather on the ability to legitimize the power exercised by one social group or political party over the rest of the society. The reason why one reaches for historical myth and politicizes historical narrative is that the emotions evoked in the process can access the mind of a common creator of history (homo historicus) much easier compared to historians’ refi ned analysis based on credible sources and proper methodology. From the perspective of historical politics, a historian – being a rational entity aware of its past (homo metahistoricus) – becomes something redundant, an obstacle that has to be silenced, suppressed or removed. All that matt ers is homo historicus, as it is the ballot in his or hers hand that will eventually determine winners and losers on election day. As is known, history writt en by the victors diff ers substantially from the one writt en by the defeated. Having diagnosed this way the situation relating to every historian aware of social responsibility of the results of historical studies, the author underlines that historical narrative may be applied to building both positive and negative social capital. Th e myth and politicization of history act toward dividing a community, rather than uniting it. Th ere is no way to create an eff ectively operating community without referring to past experiences, although when describing those experiences, it is very easy to fall into various traps of historical thinking. For this reason, neuroscience and methodology are of such a great importance to the historian of the 20th Century History.The narratives created by historians with respect to events of the past serve not only the cognitive aims, but may also be used in the current discourse of power and as such be referred to as ‘historical politics’. In such cases the spotlight is no longer on the historical truth, but rather on the ability to legitimize the power exercised by one social group or political party over the rest of the society. The reason why one reaches for historical myth and politicizes historical narrative is that the emotions evoked in the process can access the mind of a common creator of history (homo historicus) much easier compared to historians’ refi ned analysis based on credible sources and proper methodology. From the perspective of historical politics, a historian – being a rational entity aware of its past (homo metahistoricus) – becomes something redundant, an obstacle that has to be silenced, suppressed or removed. All that matt ers is homo historicus, as it is the ballot in his or hers hand that will eventually determine winners and losers on election day. As is known, history writt en by the victors diff ers substantially from the one writt en by the defeated. Having diagnosed this way the situation relating to every historian aware of social responsibility of the results of historical studies, the author underlines that historical narrative may be applied to building both positive and negative social capital. Th e myth and politicization of history act toward dividing a community, rather than uniting it. Th ere is no way to create an eff ectively operating community without referring to past experiences, although when describing those experiences, it is very easy to fall into various traps of historical thinking. For this reason, neuroscience and methodology are of such a great importance to the historian of the 20th Century History
O RYZYKU (KRYJĄCYM SIĘ ZA MITOLOGIZACJĄ/POLITYZACJĄ HISTORII) SŁÓW KILKA
Full text linkArguments about history (as like as politics) is certainly not newfangled or unexpected. The competing visions of the past (winners and losers) are not, however, just a dispute over what and how it happened. On the contrary, it is not diffi cult to see that they infl uence not only upon the domination of the “piloted” vision of the past, but also on a particular social/political order. Th erefore in this article I try to show some risk behind the mythologization and politicization of the historical discourse.Arguments about history (as like as politics) is certainly not newfangled or unexpected. The competing visions of the past (winners and losers) are not, however, just a dispute over what and how it happened. On the contrary, it is not diffi cult to see that they infl uence not only upon the domination of the “piloted” vision of the past, but also on a particular social/political order. Th erefore in this article I try to show some risk behind the mythologization and politicization of the historical discourse
BADANIA PROWADZONE W ZAKŁADZIE HISTORII HISTORIOGRAFII I METODOLOGII HISTORII INSTYTUTU HISTORII UNIWERSYTETU RZESZOWSKIEGO (2001-2016)
Full text linkThe systematic research in the fi eld of the history of historiography at the University of Rzeszow ought to be connected with the establishment of the Department of History of Historiography and Methodology of History at the Institute of History in 1993. Th e cooperation with scientifi c circles from Poland, Austria, Germany and Ukraine led to the production and publication of a number of papers on the historical community of Lviv (until 1939) as well as theoretical studies on the history of historiography and biography. Owing to the rich ethnic and cultural mosaic, the former capital of Galicia created a unique opportunity to develop methodological concepts that introduced new fi elds of analysis and interpretation of sources. In the undertaken studies, we managed to combine a traditional, elitist and personalistic way of looking at a historical environment in cultural contexts, including areas where historiography the history of culture meet, and so do thehistory of education, the methodology of history, and the history of institutions, archives, libraries and scientifi c societies. Th e aim at that time was to focus on the problems of Polish and Ukrainian historiographies that created nations, the teaching and popularization of history, national heroes, and the role played by historians in the socio-political life of the Polish and Ukrainian nations. Particular att ention was drawn to the processes of forming the history of historiography and methodology of history as separate historical subdisciplines, and Ukrainian scientifi c achievements in these fi elds were analyzed and the trends of their further development were pointed out. It was considered important to emphasize the role of methodological refl ection for contemporary historiographic studies, as well as to identify the place thatThe systematic research in the fi eld of the history of historiography at the University of Rzeszow ought to be connected with the establishment of the Department of History of Historiography and Methodology of History at the Institute of History in 1993. Th e cooperation with scientifi c circles from Poland, Austria, Germany and Ukraine led to the production and publication of a number of papers on the historical community of Lviv (until 1939) as well as theoretical studies on the history of historiography and biography. Owing to the rich ethnic and cultural mosaic, the former capital of Galicia created a unique opportunity to develop methodological concepts that introduced new fi elds of analysis and interpretation of sources. In the undertaken studies, we managed to combine a traditional, elitist and personalistic way of looking at a historical environment in cultural contexts, including areas where historiography the history of culture meet, and so do thehistory of education, the methodology of history, and the history of institutions, archives, libraries and scientifi c societies. Th e aim at that time was to focus on the problems of Polish and Ukrainian historiographies that created nations, the teaching and popularization of history, national heroes, and the role played by historians in the socio-political life of the Polish and Ukrainian nations. Particular att ention was drawn to the processes of forming the history of historiography and methodology of history as separate historical subdisciplines, and Ukrainian scientifi c achievements in these fi elds were analyzed and the trends of their further development were pointed out. It was considered important to emphasize the role of methodological refl ection for contemporary historiographic studies, as well as to identify the place tha