Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Essentialism
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== In historiography == Essentialism in history as a field of study entails discerning and listing essential cultural characteristics of a particular nation or culture, in the belief that a people or culture can be understood in this way. Sometimes such essentialism leads to claims of a praiseworthy national or cultural identity, or to its opposite, the condemnation of a culture based on presumed essential characteristics. [[Herodotus]], for example, claims that Egyptian culture is essentially feminized and possesses a "softness" which has made Egypt easy to conquer.<ref>DeLapp 177.</ref> To what extent Herodotus was an essentialist is a matter of debate; he is also credited with not essentializing the concept of the Athenian identity,<ref>Lape 149-52.</ref> or differences between the Greeks and the Persians that are the subject of his ''[[Histories (Herodotus)|Histories]]''.<ref>Gruen 39.</ref> Essentialism had been operative in [[colonialism]], as well as in critiques of colonialism. [[Post-colonial]] theorists, such as [[Edward Said]], insisted that essentialism was the "defining mode" of "Western" historiography and ethnography until the nineteenth century and even after, according to [[Touraj Atabaki]], manifesting itself in the historiography of the Middle East and Central Asia as [[Eurocentrism]], over-generalization, and [[reductionism]].<ref>Atabaki 6-7.</ref> Into the 21st century, most historians, social scientists, and humanists reject methodologies associated with essentialism,<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Phillips|first=Anne|date=1 March 2011|title=What's wrong with essentialism?|url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1600910X.2010.9672755|journal=Distinktion: Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory|volume=11|issue=1|pages=47β60|doi=10.1080/1600910X.2010.9672755|s2cid=145373912}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=Cody|first=Lisa Forman|date=1 December 2015|title=Essentialism in Context|work=Perspectives on History|url=https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/december-2015/essentialism-in-context}}</ref> although some have argued that certain varieties of essentialism may be useful or even necessary.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Sayer|first=Andrew|date=1 August 1997|title=Essentialism, Social Constructionism, and beyond|url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-954X.00073?journalCode=sora|journal=The Sociological Review|volume=45|issue=3|pages=453β487|doi=10.1111/1467-954X.00073|s2cid=145731202}}</ref> [[Karl Popper]] splits the ambiguous term ''[[Philosophical realism|realism]]'' into ''essentialism'' and ''realism''. He uses ''essentialism'' whenever he means the opposite of [[nominalism]], and ''realism'' only as opposed to [[idealism]]. Popper himself is a realist as opposed to an idealist, but a methodological nominalist as opposed to an essentialist. For example, statements like "a puppy is a young dog" should be read from right to left as an answer to "What shall we call a young dog", never from left to right as an answer to "What is a puppy?"<ref>''The Open Society and its Enemies'', passim.</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)