Power users and mods just keep repeating: “History is not a science because culture (i.e., god) is all-powerful. We might use evidence but we distrust grand theories.”

    • CountryBreakfast
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      I didn’t read through the thread very thoroughly to get their take but it seems that even if culture was inhibiting to understanding history that an awareness of culture could mitigate this. Are there not theories of culture? I’m sure an anthropologist could help. I don’t see why it’s so damning lol other disciplines have learned to deal with this and the historians that aren’t doing this are certainly able to.

      • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I mean, sociology is a field and ideology is a subject of study, it just so happens that sociology has maybe the strongest Marxist skew (in terms of proportion of adherents) of any academic field, which is a real thonk moment for these dipshits saying culture is a confounding variable for historical materialism as though it is an uncaused cause (hint: it isn’t)

      • ZoomeristLeninist [comrade/them, she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        its reddit logo so this sub selects for the most annoying, racist bourgeois historians. the moderator who gave OP a long response revealed their attitude toward history as non-scientific due to “culture”. they backed this up by citing gender norms on clothing color being different in different areas. which is horrible evidence since gender as a concept was very similar in the two examples of England and Italy