History: Science or Social Science

From ancient times onwards, there are two ways of understanding society and its interactions – science and humanities. Science is generally considered as completely genuine knowledge that can be tested and validated. On the other hand, the subjects under humanities are treated with perspectives on different aspects of human life. Thus, the pre-modern understanding of science and social sciences is that of two opposite binaries.

History as a Science

The Latin word ‘Scientia’ means organised knowledge. In this sense, history is also a science, it is an organised knowledge of the past. Every argument in support of the scientific status of history in the modern period begins with J.B. Bury’s inaugural lecture at Cambridge in 1903 on the ‘Science of History’. In this lecture, he insisted ‘history is a science, no less no more’. This argument gained wide acceptance among historians of the scientific age. John Seely asserted that “History was a science, and had nothing to do with literature”. Meanwhile, the argument ‘history as a science’ created widespread debates among historians about the disciplinary status of history. These debates mainly centred around three arguments: history as a science, history as an art, and history as a social science. There has been an argument that history can be a science. On the other hand, questions rose about whether history can be a science.

Scientific Status of History

Scientific attitudes in history go back to the time of Thucydides. He was perhaps one of the earliest historians who tried to separate history from poetics and from narratives. He began to follow the model of the development of the science of medicine, which was the field of science that was quite developed in Thucydides’ time. Hence he is regarded as the father of scientific history.

Auguste Comte, the founder of Positivism, believed that the inductive method used in the natural sciences needed to be applied to history as well as the humanities in general. He also claimed scientific status for the humanities. He thought that all societies operated through certain general laws that needed to be discovered.

The impact of science on historiography at the end of the eighteenth century was immense. It was the age of inventions, which influenced all the branches of knowledge. During this age of science, the argument that history can be scientific got momentum. Now, historians insisted that history must follow scientific models. Now scientific methods were systematically applied to the study of human affairs. The Newtonian tradition and the Darwinian Evolution, which brought history into science reinforced the practice of applying the principles of science to historical writing.

History could be considered a science in the following terms.

  ü  The term, ‘history’ itself refers to an inquiry to reveal the truth. Historical research aims at discovering the truths of the past. Science also focuses on finding out of truth. Further, history seeks to find out the truth by adopting a rational approach, it is a science.

  ü  Like science, history begins from the knowledge of our own ignorance and proceeds from the known to the unknown, from ignorance to knowledge, from indefinite to definite.

  ü  History seeks to find out answers to the different questions asked by historians. Similarly, the basis of scientific research is also to find out answers to various questions.

  ü  The method of historical research involves the methods of science. Analysis, classification, and interpretation of historical sources are inextricably linked with scientific methods.

  ü  History employs scientific methods of inquiry. It uses various methods of investigation such as observation, classification, and analysis of evidence.

  ü  The historical research activities like formulation of hypothesis, finding out cause and effects, and the method of generalisations are the methods of science. 

  ü  The inductive view of the historical method, i.e. collecting facts and interpreting them is an accepted method of science.

  ü  The interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary and trans-disciplinary approaches in history link it with scientific inquiries.

R.G. Collingwood drew a sharp line between the world of nature, which was the object of scientific inquiry and the world of human past, which was the target of historical investigation and tried to establish that history was certainly more than a science, a science of some special kind.

History is not a Science

E.H. Carr differentiates history and all science by raising five major points:

1. History deals with the unique and particular and science with the general and universal,
2. History teaches no lessons,      
3. History is unable to predict,
4. History is necessarily subjective and
5. History involves issues of religion and morality.

Historians’ method of research was quite different from that of the scientist. The basic differences are:

  ü  Science is experimental and its results could be repeated or reproduced while history is not experimental and historical events could not be repeated. In history, it is quite impossible to undertake an experiment on a man or his activities or his ideas.

  ü  In history it is not possible to formulate generalizations or predict the future with certainly.

  ü  Science deals with physical or natural objects. But, history is concerned with the experiences of human beings. It cannot be reduced to any formula nor subjected to any universally applicable laws.

  ü  To arrive at objective conclusions is impossible for a historian, whereas natural scientists can arrive at objective conclusions.

  ü  Historians make moral judgments on the individuals participating in historical events which are not the characteristics of science. 

  ü  Scientist invents, but historian discovers. Hence the finished products of science and history are differently organized.

  ü  History differs from exact sciences in its stages of the beginning and conclusion.

  ü  In history, each event has a place and date and is unique in nature. But, scientific conclusions about things have no special habitation in space or time.

  ü  History deals with unorganized facts from which no valid conclusions could be drawn.

  ü  Values, opinions, perspectives, and ideologies hold a significant place in history. But they have no place in science.

History as Social Science

Social science can be defined as a study of men living in society. These studies generally use narrative and descriptive methods to portray the life of the people. It is humanistic and artistic in character and thereby different from science and its methods. The subject matter of history is the man and his environment. Thus reconstructing the past as history is inevitably linked with literary and artistic nature. In this sense, history qualifies itself to be a part of the social sciences.

History traditionally refers to the study and interpretation of the written record of past human activity, people, societies, and civilizations leading up to the present day. It is the continuous, systematic narrative and research of past events relating to the human species and the study of all events in time in relation to humanity. As the narrative account of the past, history is an art. As the narrator, the historian looks at the past from a certain point of view. A historian differs from a scientist when he communicates his results. The scientist simply reports whereas a historian conveys human experience. Historian uses their perspectives, imagination, and critical thinking in reconstructing the past.

Most historians of the modern period consider history a central social science. The key focus in history is the human experience. The foremost duty of the historian is to reconstruct the past through the analysis of the evidence. A historian has no direct experience of the phenomena which he tries to explain. This involves the interpretation of the facts, which necessitates the skills of a social scientist. Further, as the narrative account of the past, history is an art. In the fields of exposition and documentation, a historian is to be a careful artist. He has to use his imaginative vision, the talents of erudition and the expression of an artist.

Understanding of history as a social science took a paradigm shift in the later course of historical research. Modern historians devised the theories and concepts of other social sciences in the interpretation of historical themes. This further broadened historical understanding and research.

To conclude, history is a balanced blending of both science and social science. When history attempts to discover the truth it is a science and when it narrates the truth it is an art. Historians can adopt scientific attitudes which will make the interpretation objective. But, history is different from science with its subject matter and way of presentation. It is a halfway house between science and social science.