The Social Scientist as Security Actor

IF 0.3 3区 历史学 Q2 HISTORY
C. Krüger
{"title":"The Social Scientist as Security Actor","authors":"C. Krüger","doi":"10.1177/16118944221091114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Recent historiography has been more positive about the Wilhelmine German Empire, which long had a poor reputation. This might be partly due to the trend towards transnational history with a specific focus on transfer and exchange. This article argues that from such a perspective the re-evaluation of the German Empire may easily overshoot the mark. Focusing on a comparative study of Hamburg and London, it analyses a classic topic of transnational history—the field of science and social reform. However, by approaching it in the context of a history of security, the article provides a valuable corrective in the debate on the German Empire. It thereby also opens a new path for the history of security. Although security and knowledge are closely interrelated, this relationship has been rather neglected in the historiography. It is argued here that security concerns related to social unrest were a major factor that gave rise to the emergence of the social sciences at the turn of the 20th century. Social reformers and social scientists believed that supposedly neutral scientific knowledge was a prerequisite for resolving social conflicts. However, public acceptance of their expert status in security matters was far from self-evident. While they met fierce opposition in Hamburg, liberal and democratic traditions facilitated its acceptance in London.","PeriodicalId":44275,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Modern European History","volume":"20 1","pages":"258 - 273"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Modern European History","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/16118944221091114","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Recent historiography has been more positive about the Wilhelmine German Empire, which long had a poor reputation. This might be partly due to the trend towards transnational history with a specific focus on transfer and exchange. This article argues that from such a perspective the re-evaluation of the German Empire may easily overshoot the mark. Focusing on a comparative study of Hamburg and London, it analyses a classic topic of transnational history—the field of science and social reform. However, by approaching it in the context of a history of security, the article provides a valuable corrective in the debate on the German Empire. It thereby also opens a new path for the history of security. Although security and knowledge are closely interrelated, this relationship has been rather neglected in the historiography. It is argued here that security concerns related to social unrest were a major factor that gave rise to the emergence of the social sciences at the turn of the 20th century. Social reformers and social scientists believed that supposedly neutral scientific knowledge was a prerequisite for resolving social conflicts. However, public acceptance of their expert status in security matters was far from self-evident. While they met fierce opposition in Hamburg, liberal and democratic traditions facilitated its acceptance in London.
作为安全行动者的社会科学家
最近的史学界对长期声誉不佳的威廉德意志帝国持更积极的态度。这在一定程度上可能是由于跨国历史的趋势,特别关注转移和交换。本文认为,从这样一个角度来看,对德意志帝国的重新评价可能很容易越界。通过对汉堡和伦敦的比较研究,分析了跨国历史的一个经典话题——科学与社会改革领域。然而,通过将其放在安全史的背景下处理,这篇文章为关于德意志帝国的辩论提供了一个有价值的纠正。从而也为安全史开辟了一条新的道路。尽管安全与知识密切相关,但这种关系在史学界却被忽视了。这里有人认为,与社会动荡有关的安全问题是导致20世纪之交社会科学出现的一个主要因素。社会改革者和社会科学家认为,所谓中立的科学知识是解决社会冲突的先决条件。然而,公众对他们在安全问题上的专家地位的接受远非不言自明。虽然他们在汉堡遇到了激烈的反对,但自由和民主的传统促进了它在伦敦的接受。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信