Historiography deals with the writing of history. In the broadest sense, it is the study of the history of history as it is described by historians. Historiography has several facets, but for the purposes of a researcher trying to situate his work in the context of other historians' work on a particular topic, the most useful thing is the historiographic essay or review article that summarizes changing ideas about and approaches to the topic. A really good historiographic essay will also address why historians' ideas have changed. Search this Guide Search.
A Quick History of Philosophy
Enlightened Historiography - Making History
Types of Writing Assignments. Basic Considerations When Writing on History. Types of Sources. Critical Reading. Preparation and Writing. Basic Quoting Skills. Style and Editing.
Ideas in Context Ser. The essays in Part II consider a number of case-histories. Author Richard Rorty. Format Paperback. On the one hand intellectual historians commonly accuse philosophers of writing bad - anachronistic - history of philosophy, and on the other, philosophers have accused intellectual historians of writing bad - antiquarian - history of philosophy.
After eighteenth-century historians of philosophy such as Brucker and Tiedemann had written the history of philosophy in interpretively questionable, Whiggish terms as a march of progress toward the supposedly true Leibnizian-Wolffian philosophy, and in a context in which both Kant and Hegel themselves and their myriad followers were busy writing the history of philosophy in interpretively questionable, Whiggish terms as a march of progress toward their own supposedly true philosophical positions, Schleiermacher entered the scene as an important and influential champion of interpretive scrupulousness in the historiography of philosophy. His hermeneutics developed a demanding general methodology for interpretation that proved very influential and beneficial for work on the history of philosophy in particular. As we have seen, that methodology was largely motivated by the problem of the intellectual distance that usually separates an interpreter from the interpretee, and the natural tendency to misunderstanding that this creates.