This course is a part of HF's PhD week.
Humanities research sometimes concerns itself with many of the same types of questions and use the same sources as social sciences. For some dealing with society and politics, the toolbox is to some extent also shared, especially where social scientists take a pluralist approach to their conduct of inquiry. Yet, there may be subtle differences between the two when it comes to epistemological and normative assumptions.
One example is the approach to generalisation and case selection. In social science methodologies nomothetic generalisation – the search for law-like co-variation between variables – plays a major part. While such generalisation is something of a baseline that social scientists somehow have to deal with, either through embracing it or distancing themselves from it, humanities scholars seldom consider such generalisation equally relevant.
Another example is the approach to evaluation and recommendation. Social scientists have their standard repertoire of how to relate to ethical and political considerations and societal applicability in research. On this basis they offer policy recommendations. The repertoire to rely on in the sphere of politics and policy is typically less straightforward in the humanities, and many humanities scholars would seek to keep this sphere at a distance.
This situation results sometimes in extensive borrowing practices, where perspectives, methods and toolboxes travel from social sciences to the humanities. However, when humanities scholars ‘borrow’ from social science, it is important to remember that social scientists’ ways of doing things may come with a strong anchoring in specific epistemological wagers and particular ideas of what is good scholarship and a proper relationship between academic inquiries and societal needs. Humanities scholars who use social science approaches and tools need to maintain a discerning attitude to their goals and uses. To be able to discern, they need to understand the choices that are available to them and the assumptions and implications of the alternatives they choose. Such choices have implications for the kind of knowledge they generate, and both being clear about the implications, and perhaps choosing strategies and tools that are closest to their own, pre-existing concerns, is crucial for maintaining their research programmes.
This is a 1 ECTS course.
Prerequisites
All participants are required to write a 1,000 word reflection paper where they relate their project to one or more of the curriculum contributions. The reflection papers will be presented and discussed during the workshop. Please send your reflection paper to einar.wigen@ikos.uio.no and cathrine.holst@ifikk.uio.no no later than 26 November.
Programme
To be announced.
Course curriculum
- Abbott, Andrew (2001) Chaos of Disciplines. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Chapter 1: Chaos of Disciplines, pp. 3-33.
-
Berridge, V. 2018. Why Policy Needs History (and Historians), Health Economics, Policy, and Law, 13, 369-381. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744133117000433
-
Brom, F. W. A. 2019. Institutionalizing applied humanities: enabling a stronger role for the humanities in interdisciplinary research for public policy, Palgrave Communication 5, 72. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0281-2
Case Selection in Small-N Research | Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics
-
Christensen, J., C. Holst and A. Molander. 2022. Expertise, Policy-making, and Democracy. Introduction, Chapter 1-2. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003106555
-
Drees, W. B. 2021. What are the Humanities For? Ch. 7, p.172-188. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108974615
-
Green, A. 2015. History as Expertise and the Influence of Political Culture on Advice for Policy Since Fulton, Contemporary British History, 29(1), 27-50. https://doi.org/10.1080/13619462.2014.953485
-
Haddon, C. et al. 2015. What is the value of history in policy-making? Report. Arts & Humanities Research Council, UK. What Is the Value of History in Policymaking? | Institute for Government
-
Jackson, Patrick T. (2010) The Conduct of Inquiry in International Relations: Philosophy of Science and Its Implications for the Study of World Politics London: Routledge, chapters 1 “Playing with Fire”, 2 “Philosophical Wagers” and 7 “A Pluralist Conception of IR”.
-
Kwame, A.A. 2022. Philosophy, The Humanities & the Life of Freedom, Daedalus, 151 (3), 180–193. https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01937
- Shotter, John. Cultural Politics of Everyday Life: Social Constructionism, Rhetoric and Knowing of the Third Kind. Buckingham: Open University Press, 1993. Chapters 1, 2 and 7.
- Swidler, Ann. Talk of Love: How Culture Matters. Chicago, Ill.: The University Of Chicago Press, 2003, chapters 1, 4 and 9.
- Weber, Max Max “Objectivity in the Social Sciences”, in Weber on the Methodology of the Social Sciences, pp. 49-110.
Language
The course language is English.
Registration
The course is open to PhD fellows, completion grant holders, and post-doctoral fellows at the Faculty of Humanities, other UiO faculties and external PhD fellows.
Registration opens 1 October, 12:00. Priority will be given to PhDs from the Faculty of Humanities, then PhDs from other Faculties at UiO, and lastly other applicants.
Course convenors
Einar Wigen, einar.wigen@ikos.uio.no, IKOS
Cathrine Holst, cathrine.holst@ifikk.uio.no, IFIKK
IKOS, responsible department