Takeaway 🏃 – A New Field: History of Humanities
- Zusammenfassung:: This paper offers an introduction to the newly created History of Humanities journal. It seeks to find a definition, or rather a multitude of definitions, for the term “Humanities” and aims to identify its purpose and future goals.
- Motivation:: Highlight the societal importance of the Humanities, making researchers’ “cause more tangible” through reflecting the field’s history
- The introduction is an incredibly positive and motivating, then very realistic look at the humanities
- Ergebnisse:: The journal as a new place for discussion and reflection
- 1 | The Humanities have long been undervalued
- 3 | Early definitions in Europe: Wilhelm Dilthey first differentiates between Geisteswissenschaften vs Naturwissenschaften
- 4 | Islam: studia adabiya, China: Confucius’ six arts
- 4 | English as a lingua franca and the difficulties to find common ground through intranslatable terms (“Wissenschaft” vs “Sciences/Humanities”)
- 5 | Eurocentrism, e.g. applying Western terminology for Eastern practices and historical artifacts
- Highlights:: highlights-zu-bod2016
- Gelesen am:: 2022-10-23
Bod, Rens, Julia Kursell, Jaap Maat & Thijs Weststeijn. 2016. A New Field: History of Humanities. *History of Humanities_. The University of Chicago Press 1(1). 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1086/685056.