Jared Diamond: 'We're uncomfortable about considering history as a science. It's classified as a social science, which is considered not quite scientific.'

We're uncomfortable about considering history as a science. It's classified as a social science, which is considered not quite scientific.

In his quote, renowned historian and author Jared Diamond expresses the unease many people feel when considering history as a science. He highlights how history is classified under the umbrella of social sciences, which may be perceived as less scientific than the natural sciences. This notion sparks an important conversation about the nature of history and its relationship to other disciplines. However, to delve even deeper into this topic and bring a sense of intrigue, let us explore the unexpected concept of "historical relativism" and how it challenges our understanding of history as a social science.At its core, Diamond's quote calls attention to the perceived divide between the natural sciences, which are often seen as objective and empirical, and the social sciences, which are frequently characterized as more subjective and interpretive. By classifying history as a social science, some individuals might question its scientific legitimacy. Despite its empirical basis in evidence and analysis, history has been traditionally associated with subjectivity due to its reliance on interpretation and the inherent biases of historians.However, the introduction of historical relativism adds an intriguing twist to this discourse. Historical relativism posits that our understanding of history is not fixed or absolute, but rather contingent on various factors such as cultural context, perspective, and personal biases. This concept challenges the notion of history as a purely objective science, instead embracing the idea that history is shaped by subjective interpretations and constantly evolving narratives.In contrast to the linear and definitive nature often attributed to natural sciences, the study of history requires a level of interpretation and critical analysis. It involves piecing together fragmentary evidence, analyzing primary sources, and constructing narratives to make sense of the past. This subjective element, however, does not diminish the scientific value of history but rather enriches its complexity.By acknowledging historical relativism, we can appreciate the multidimensionality of history as a social science. While the natural sciences aim to uncover universal laws and principles, history examines the intricate interplay of human actions, motivations, and cultural influences. History allows us to understand the past through the eyes of those who experienced it, shedding light on the diversity of human experiences across time and place.Furthermore, historical relativism encourages us to question dominant narratives and recognize the presence of multiple perspectives. History is not just a compilation of facts but a subjective interpretation of events. Every historian brings their own biases, cultural context, and value systems to their work, shaping the narratives that emerge. Understanding this relativity helps us challenge and revise traditional historical accounts, revealing the importance of including marginalized voices and previously overlooked perspectives.In conclusion, Jared Diamond's quote prompts us to reflect on the classification of history as a social science and its perceived scientific legitimacy. While history may differ from the natural sciences in its interpretive nature, the introduction of historical relativism challenges us to view it as a science that embraces subjectivity and cultural context. By recognizing the relativity of historical narratives, we can appreciate the rich complexity of the human experience and work towards a more inclusive and nuanced understanding of the past.