Embedded Files
Those who study history, especially comparative history, are burdened by the constant and sobering reminder that no matter how intelligently purposeful human beings may consider themselves, at the end of the day—that is, in the last instance—social transformations (meaning macro-level social change) are as much a product of chance and circumstance as directed human endeavors (in the shape of “social movements”—broadly understood). To put the matter differently: any teleological order that may appear to exist in the history of social transformations is in reality a figment of the historian's imagination.
Those who study history, especially comparative history, are burdened by the constant and sobering reminder that no matter how intelligently purposeful human beings may consider themselves, at the end of the day—that is, in the last instance—social transformations (meaning macro-level social change) are as much a product of chance and circumstance as directed human endeavors (in the shape of “social movements”—broadly understood). To put the matter differently: any teleological order that may appear to exist in the history of social transformations is in reality a figment of the historian's imagination.
History, in the sense of historiography, is, ultimately, a selective chronicle of a series of conjunctures of fortuitously 'propitious' factors where the role of human agency, while not entirely absent (hence the qualifier: ultimately), is, more often than not, far from pivotal to the social transformation in question. Stephen K. Sanderson, in his book Social Transformations: A General Theory of Historical Development (Blackwell, 1995), makes this point with even greater clarity:
History, in the sense of historiography, is, ultimately, a selective chronicle of a series of conjunctures of fortuitously 'propitious' factors where the role of human agency, while not entirely absent (hence the qualifier: ultimately), is, more often than not, far from pivotal to the social transformation in question. Stephen K. Sanderson, in his book Social Transformations: A General Theory of Historical Development (Blackwell, 1995), makes this point with even greater clarity:
[I]ndividuals acting in their own interests create social structures and systems that are the sum total and product of these socially oriented individual actions. These social structures and systems are frequently constituted in ways that individuals never intended, and thus individually purposive human action leads to many unintended consequences. Social evolution is driven by purposive or intended human actions, but it is to a large extent not itself a purposive or intended phenomenon. (p. 13)
[I]ndividuals acting in their own interests create social structures and systems that are the sum total and product of these socially oriented individual actions. These social structures and systems are frequently constituted in ways that individuals never intended, and thus individually purposive human action leads to many unintended consequences. Social evolution is driven by purposive or intended human actions, but it is to a large extent not itself a purposive or intended phenomenon. (p. 13)
Google Sites
Report abuse