This week, ending in March 13th, 2014:
Today's thread is for open discussion of:
History in the academy
Historiographical disputes, debates and rivalries
Implications of historical theory both abstractly and in application
Philosophy of history
And so on
Regular participants in the Thursday threads should just keep doing what they've been doing; newcomers should take notice that this thread is meant for open discussion only of matters like those above, not just anything you like -- we'll have a thread on Friday for that, as usual.
Anyone at the ASEH conference in San Francisco today? I'm giving a paper at 11am, and then hoping to find a nice bar.
This falls more under the philosophy of History, but what is the general opinion on this argument: "Part of why we study history is to learn human nature, one of the few constants throughout history."
Would you agree or disagree that part of why we learn history is to learn human nature, and do you agree or disagree that it is a constant?
Does anyone here have experience with academia.edu? I'm on there but I haven't uploaded any papers or anything. Every time I'm in a conference, I get updates that people have searched for me and found my page there, and I'm considering uploading my conference papers. It seems like an easy way to make a bit of work available to interested parties without the investment in time necessary to publish. Any good reasons why one should not do this?
How much weight does the theory of anacyclosis hold in todays historian society?
[The basic theory of Polybius] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anacyclosis) is what I am refering to. (sorry for the wiki link, it is simply for convenience)
Where does historiography begin and journalism end? What, if any, are the methodological differences between the two?
Is there any legitimacy to the Sonderweg theory?