From: "Tobin Nellhaus" <nellhaus-AT-gwi.net>
Subject: Whiggish history
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1998 10:59:39 +0300


George wrote:

> One thing I wanted to suggest with my remarks is that the
>anti-Whiggish historians of science are equally caught up in advancing
>an image of science that serves their own interests, that is, the image
>of science that legitimizes their own scientific/scholarly productions.

I agree wholeheartedly with this, and also about the importance of science
and dangers of anti-scientism.  (Some of you may distantly remember my
mention of critical realism a year or so ago, a position that is strongly
pro-science yet firmly antipositivist; and Bourdieu can I think be described
as a critical realist.)

Regarding "Whiggish history," however, you wrote:

> As I understand it, Whiggish means "liberal" and broadly
>"progressive," i.e. the opposite of conservative.

As I understand the phrase (and I could be mistaken, it's always given me
difficulty), Whiggish history is not simply progressive or liberal, but also
claims that the outcome (i.e., their own political dominance) was the best
possible and even inevitable.

---
Tobin Nellhaus
nellhaus-AT-gwi.net *or* tobin.nellhaus-AT-helsinki.fi
"Faith requires us to be materialists without flinching": C.S. Peirce


**********************************************************************
Contributions: bourdieu-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: bourdieu-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu