Entscheiden als Problem der Geschichtswissenschaft.

IF 0.1 4区 历史学 Q3 HISTORY ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG Pub Date : 2018-06-01 DOI:10.3790/ZHF.45.2.217
Philip R. Hoffmann-Rehnitz, A. Krischer, Matthias Pohlig
{"title":"Entscheiden als Problem der Geschichtswissenschaft.","authors":"Philip R. Hoffmann-Rehnitz, A. Krischer, Matthias Pohlig","doi":"10.3790/ZHF.45.2.217","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Decision-Making and History From antiquity on, decisions have been a central topic of historiography. On a conceptual level, historians have rarely thought about the questions what a decision is, how decisions are made, and if deciding has a history. Instead, the terms have been used in amore or less every day manner. After shortly presenting how decisions and decision making have been understood and discussed in historiography, we attempt to identify deciding as a specific type of social action. Deciding is orientated towards producing a decision. As trite as that sounds, it emerges that an explication of this definition could be away to outline deciding/decisions as an object of historical research. We argue that deciding is not as self-evident as it seems but that it is a processual activity based on a number of specific, culturally shaped conditions. The way how decisions are made and the conditions under which they are made are different according to social and cultural contexts. Thus, they have a historical dimension. At the same time, deciding is multidimensional and complex. In order to show this complexity, we present several dimensions that have to be taken into account: the framing of decision-making, its performance, its mediality, materiality, and resources. Finally, we discuss the historicity of decision-making with regard to the distinction between modernity and premodernity.","PeriodicalId":54000,"journal":{"name":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE FORSCHUNG","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3790/ZHF.45.2.217","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Decision-Making and History From antiquity on, decisions have been a central topic of historiography. On a conceptual level, historians have rarely thought about the questions what a decision is, how decisions are made, and if deciding has a history. Instead, the terms have been used in amore or less every day manner. After shortly presenting how decisions and decision making have been understood and discussed in historiography, we attempt to identify deciding as a specific type of social action. Deciding is orientated towards producing a decision. As trite as that sounds, it emerges that an explication of this definition could be away to outline deciding/decisions as an object of historical research. We argue that deciding is not as self-evident as it seems but that it is a processual activity based on a number of specific, culturally shaped conditions. The way how decisions are made and the conditions under which they are made are different according to social and cultural contexts. Thus, they have a historical dimension. At the same time, deciding is multidimensional and complex. In order to show this complexity, we present several dimensions that have to be taken into account: the framing of decision-making, its performance, its mediality, materiality, and resources. Finally, we discuss the historicity of decision-making with regard to the distinction between modernity and premodernity.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
把这里变成了历史学的问题
决策与历史自古以来,决策一直是史学的中心主题。在概念层面上,历史学家很少思考决策是什么,决策是如何做出的,以及决策是否有历史。相反,这些术语或多或少每天都在使用。在简要介绍了决策和决策制定在史学中是如何被理解和讨论的之后,我们试图将决策确定为一种特定类型的社会行动。决策的目的是产生一个决策。尽管这听起来很老套,但对这一定义的解释可能会使决定/决定成为历史研究的对象。我们认为,决策并不像看起来那样不证自明,而是一种基于许多特定的、文化塑造的条件的过程性活动。根据社会和文化背景,做出决定的方式和条件是不同的。因此,它们具有历史维度。同时,决策是多维的、复杂的。为了展示这种复杂性,我们提出了必须考虑的几个维度:决策框架、绩效、中介性、物质性和资源。最后,我们从现代性与前现代性的区别出发,讨论决策的历史性。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
期刊介绍: Das Arbeitsgebiet der ZHF umfaßt die europäische Geschichte etwa vom 13. bis 19. Jahrhundert. Neben der politischen Geschichte werden in besonderem Maße auch Rechtsgeschichte, Kulturgeschichte sowie Sozialgeschichte berücksichtigt. Neuerscheinungen zu den genannten Gebieten werden in einem umfangreichen Rezensionsteil besprochen.
期刊最新文献
Die Autonomiestädte der Frühen Neuzeit „Souveränitätskrise“ und dauerhafte Kontrolle des „Vorfeldes“? Die Hochphase des deutschen Versklavungshandels Nur mit Papier, Feder und Wachs „Darzu mancher Mann sich viel zu schwach unnd zu wenig Befinden wu‍[e]‌rde“
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1