Dialectical Relationship between History and Other elements of Social Science
By:
Saefur Rochmat
Abstract:
The development of sciences and technology at modern era does not guarantee the
problems of human being be resolved completely. It has also had negative impacts such
as the disparities of the have and the have not, of the rich country and poor country;
colonialism/imperialism; world wars; and so on. These negative impacts, of course,
contradict with the mission of philosophy as the root of all sciences which pretends to
teach man with wisdom. They are as a result of specialization of sciences which neglect
their relationship with philosophy. This article also argues that all sciences should
develop dialectical relationship with each other.
Key words: philosophy, history, social sciences, integral approach, multi-dimensional
approach.
A. Introduction
All sciences root in philosophy. It is not surprising that philosophy is meant
wisdom. It implies that all sciences aim to search for the truth by which people are able to
deal with the problems wisely. Wisdom is the combination of knowledge and experience,
besides a brave to implement the knowledge in the real living situation. The
characteristics of the wisdom are to behave in justice, to treat the problems with
proportional, to be patient, besides to persist to the principles of life. That is why
universities of the West confer the highest academic status with the title of ‘Philosophy
Doctor’ a part of its discipline. By conferring lecturer with the quality of philosophy, it
hopes that he/she will be able to develop wisdom in arranging this worldly life (Maarif,
2005a: 3).
This early initiative is very ideal, a part of the fact that now the West become
more secular in living so that the holder of Ph. D is no more than white collar worker
minus wisdom. It is as a result of specialization of sciences which neglect philosophy as
the source of them. Scholars who enjoy doing a research on his specialization without
1
any will to relate it to the widely worldly affairs, as if they live in small cage, although it
is nice but it is nothing worth for this widely worldly living of without limit (Maarif,
2005b: 5).
Scholar is not properly to swim just within his small pond of his specialization.
He should understand principles of other disciplines so that he is able to handle the
complex problems of living successfully or in other words, he is able to find out the
wisdom. It is difficult to be wise man if scholars of any discipline are reluctantly to know
philosophy, religion, and social science. At the peak time of Islamic civilization, the
universities required the student of exact sciences should pass the examination of social
science at their first year.
Philosophy as the root of all sciences should be a returning point for the sciences
in order not to get lost in their mission to search for the truth by which man becomes
wise. Considering philosophy used logical procedures by a means of reason, it just
produces utopia truths (an ideal) so that we can not find them in real living in this world.
However, philosophy is very important as a source for comparing with the realities so
that we know how far our efforts have been closed to the ideality. In converse, to fulfill
the idealities of the goals we should take into considerations the empirical situation of the
targets. By so doing we understand the strong and the weak points of the real situation of
the targets and then, we arrange the necessary activities to improve them, of course by
considering the quality of the manpower and other resources. We should also consider in
our mind the barriers for improvement and then how strong the target are able to support
this improvement programs. By so doing we try to control the courses of improvement
programs so that it does not appear violence or chaotic situation while we are
implementing the goodness (the truth).
B. History: A source of Empirical Truth
To reach the idealities in humanistic way, that our efforts are not danger to
human’s living we should have an in-depth knowledge about the situation, condition, and
history of the target for the improvement. For that purposes, we need a help of history
and indeed it is the oldest sciences (Widja, 1988: 7-8). This assumption is based on the
fact that historical resources and the books of history themselves become material for all
2
kind of the social science (Kartodirjo, 1982: 75). In other words, history is the laboratory
for humankind because it provides someone with rich resources to be a wise man both in
theory as well as in practice.
Furthermore, philosophy needs a help of history for finding the empirical truth
considering that philosophy is just able to find logical truth so that its truth is limited to
just philosophical truth that is the truth which is resulted from man’s normative thinking.
Indeed normative truth is something ideal, but it is very often that it needs a long time to
materialize it in empirical truth. However, it does not guarantee that we are able to fulfill
the ideal perfectly, considering the fact that there is no absolute truth in this world. Man
is just responsible for reforming the situation and condition to improve the quality of
humanity. And then, what is meant by the empirical truth? It is something considered as
of worthy by majority of the members of the society so that it is viewed as a truth.
Considering the role of history for human living, it is not surprisingly that F.
Nietzshe is saying that “Only so far as history serves life will we serve it.” It implies that
history is very useful sciences for human living and without it philosophy is not able to
take a role for directing human living. Further, social science and humanities are in need
for historical resources to develop their sciences. Last but not the least, logical history is
in great need to solve social problems.
History should be functional to sharpen one’s human vision in the view to deal
with the unending changes of the world affairs. Koran also emphasis on the uses of
history by using the word ‘ibrah (moral sign) that is “Indeed in their stories, there is a
lesson for men of understanding. It (the Koran) is not of forged statement but a
confirmation of (God’s existing Books) which were before it [i.e. the Torah, the Gospel
and other Scriptures of God] and a detailed explanation of everything and a guide and a
Mercy for the people who believe.” (Koran 12: 111). From the above quote we may
conclude that history is the sciences of humanity which is very serious if it is understood
smartly and correctly.
Like other sciences, history roots on philosophy so that it is very important for the
lasting of the society or state. For that purposes, it should use critical thinking approach
(Maarif, 2005a: 3). It also should use multi-dimensional approach that is we should write
history by using various kinds of perspectives with the help of other social science and
3
humanities in order to find a holistic knowledge so that we are able to judge
proportionally each participating members. By so doing historian will find wisdom a
collection of all goodness (Maarif, 2005b: 6).
Indeed the big problem of human life is not a matter of history in general, but it
becomes concern of philosophy or at least philosophy of history. Alan Nevis is correctly
saying that philosophy of history results from writer’s a holistic view of humanity and
consequently it also include his philosophical life view; and the interpretation of one
historical event is only writer’s explanation concerning a series of events, an era, and a
movement (Nevis, 1962: 264). History will be lost its functional meaning to serve the life
if we think it radically. Like a wise servant, history will think through the future for
anticipating the direction of the courses of the changing so that the life will run smoothly
following the true direction. It may be an ideal hope for those who want to study without
confusing themselves with any statements that history should not be related to the future
dimension (Maarif, 2005b: 7).
Why people need history? Considering as a conscious and normal man are not
able to forget his past time, and it is history. If he wants to develop himself humanity, he
should base on the real situation and condition which actually have become a history
because of already the past time. In other words, one is not able to develop himself by
jumping the past. History wants to fill the vacant of the past so that what is meant by the
collective memories is no more than the product of historians. Collective memories
manifest into tradition and culture so that both of them should be considered by those
who want to write history and also to make a changes of the society. For example, if we
want to implement taxation system, we should know the history of taxation systems
because it is very useful: (1) to have continuation with the past taxation systems and (2)
to know any weaknesses which should be handled in the in coming new taxation system.
C. History the Sciences of Multi-Dimensional Approach
The birth of rationalism in Europe instigates the development of positivism
philosophy that sciences should be judged by basic procedures of observation or
experiment, formulation of the concepts, and verification. The fundamental method
developed here is a nomotetis method, that is a method which aims to formulate general
4
laws. In other words, this method tries to create generalization. This generalization is to
elaborate (erklaeren) the observed social phenomena.
On other hand, in the 19th century in Europe there also developed a group of
scholars developing a hermeneutic method which is meant to oppose to the positivism.
The first tried to develop an ideography method for the development of social science a
method which tries to find detailed and unique pictures of natural phenomena, especially
concerning human living affairs (Widja, 1988: 1-2).
How does the status of history in the relation to the classification of the above
sciences methods? To answer such question we should know some general characteristics
concerning the procedure of sciences. Basically sciences should adjust to six
characteristics as follow:
1. There is consciousness to pursue the TRUTH.
2. To reach such truth it should follow some certain ways called METHOD.
3. The result of scientific researches should be arranged in a certain way
SYSTEMATICALLY.
4. The result of scientific researches should have an OBJECTIVITY, that is avoids
some assumptions and determinations.
5. The result of scientific researches contains a collection of general truth or we call
it GENERALIZATIONS.
6. The above generalizations make possible for us to PREDICT some phenomena of
nature as well as man in the future (Widja, 1988: 2).
To write history correctly we should follow the above procedures of sciences.
Indeed history as part of social science and humanities can not reach the quality of truth
such as that of the exact sciences. However we are no doubt about the status of history as
a science. It is impossible to find an absolute truth, even in exact sciences. Indeed we can
not find an absolute truth in this world because of the complexity of the problems. That is
why we should have a wide heart to tolerate the truth claim of other groups because the
absolute truth belongs to God alone.
Kuntowijoyo (1999: 60-64) elaborates some characteristics of history to justify its
claim as a science as follow:
1. History is empiric
5
History belongs to empirical sciences (Greek, emperia means experience).
Experiences are recorded in documents. Historian researches these documents to find the
facts. Then, he will interpret the facts to find logical relationship amongst them so that it
will result in historical writing. A part from the fact history has fundamental differences
from exact sciences, both base on experience and observation to find the truth. Indeed it
is impossible to repeat the experiment in history, because an event happens just one time.
For example, it is impossible to repeat the already happened Indonesian Revolution, it
happens just one time and then it is swallowed by the past. History just deal the past with
the surviving documents.
Another difference between history and exact sciences is that historical facts is a
human facts, meanwhile the facts of exact sciences is a natural facts. Consequently some
accuse history of not science, however if we notice carefully history and exact sciences
have the same working procedures, the difference is just in matter of the object. The
differences between history and exact sciences are about the differences between nature
and man. Nature is a death, meanwhile man is a life. Nature is impossible to think
meanwhile man is able to think. That is why exact sciences is able to formulate natural
laws which is relatively permanent and universal, not like history.
2. History has an object
Object is in the Greek objectus is meant by target, in the face, and objective.
History often accuse of something not clear. It is usually to include history into
humanities because the object is human. Indeed history speaks about human, but its
analytical approach differs from such as anthropology and sociology. Furthermore, the
object of history is time and it is peculiar to history because no other sciences have right
claim to it. Physics speaks time of physic while history speaks time of human being. That
is why history speaks about the origin of the events. For example, Islam spread over
Indonesia in the 8th or 13th century should not be a problem for historians if we accepted
the explanations. The same case can be applied to the birth of Pancasila (national
ideology of Indonesia) whether it is on June 1st, 1945 when Soekarno mentioned
Pancasila for the first time at the meeting of PPKI or on August 18th, 1945 when
Pancasila was formally legalized in conjunction with the Constitution of Indonesia, it is
6
not a concern of historians. Historians just concern about the explanation of the evens,
meanwhile the day of celebration is a matter of political decisions.
3. History has theories
In Greek, theoria means contemplation. Like other sciences, history also has
theories of knowledge which often called philosophy of critical history. Theory contains
principles of a science. In philosophy we call it epistemology, from Greek episteme
means the knowledge and logos means the discourse. Exact sciences take nature as an
object of their researches, while social sciences take man as an object of their researches
and history has its own object man in dimension of time.
History differs from myth, although both speak about time. Myth is not able to
answer when an event happens and history deals with this question. History also is
differing itself from other social sciences because of its long tradition. In every tradition
we can find some theories.
4. History has generalization
Generalization is originally from Latin generalis means general. Like other
sciences, history also pretends to create some general statements. However, one should
put in his mind that other sciences develop a nomotetis method meanwhile history
develops an ideographic method. For example, if we discuss about pluralism in the USA,
in the view of sociology we should search some general statements which are applicable
in other places and they can be treated as the general truth. Generalization in history often
takes a role as correction to other sciences. For example, Marxists develop a theory of
struggling class but it can not be applied to the revolution of Indonesia considering the
fact that this revolution was instigated by nationalism.
5. History has its own Method
In Greek, method is methode means a way. In research, history has its own
method by using observation. If one statement is not supported by historical evidences, it
should be thrown away. For example, a statement of orthodox Marxists that
superstructure which reflects symbolic realities are not in existence, they view it just as
7
the manifestation of structure or social system. This statement is not able to defend the
attack from empirical method of history that religious belief is a cross section
consciousness. We are not able to make a law from the assumption of superstructure and
structure because there are a lot of exceptions. The laws of social science is too
mechanical, while history is not strict to the law, it just concerns about method and
historical facts. These method and historical facts force historian to be careful with his
conclusion of the event, moreover to make a law which is applicable to other places. For
example, detailed historical researches are not able to prove Prof. Moh. Yamin’s
statement that Indonesian red-white flag has been 6000 years old.
According to Kuntowijoyo (1999: 20-21), as a sciences history can develop at
least through this four following ways that are: (1) the development of philosophy, (2) the
development of theory of history, (3) the development of other sciences, and (4) the
development of history method. The development of philosophy influences the historical
report. For example, when Middle Europe Period dominated by Christian philosophy, the
historical reports also influenced by it with illustration of saints.
The development of theory of Indonesian history took place on the first national
seminar in Yogyakarta in 1957 by introducing the concept of nationalism for writing
Indonesian history. This concept of nationalism emphasis the role of Indonesia
(Indonesian center oriented history) to remove “above ship written history” which
emphasis the role Dutch colonizer (Dutch center oriented history). This challenge was
responded by John Smail in 1962 suggesting that it is possible to write Indonesian
oriented history. For example, if we want to write history of Aceh we should focus on the
conflict between clerics and officer of traditional kingdom of Acehness. Foreigners who
involved within it are written playing an additional role of those who were conflicting.
The development of other sciences also influences the development of history.
When sociologists take a city as a field studies, in history it appears history of the city. It
also happens when Freudian psychology replaced by neo-Freudian, it influences the
development of psycho-history, that is history which elaborates historical figures’
psychological conditions.
8
The development within method also influences historical writing. When it
appears quantitative method, historians in America and Europe also develop quantitative
history, because it is possible for them to quantify old historical resources. The activities
of publishing historical resources also will propel historical research such as the printing
of local history of Sarekat Islam by National Archive of Indonesia propels some
historical researches.
Conclusion
It is impossible to develop a sciences by isolating it from the development of
other sciences because all sciences are interrelated each other. At first all sciences are
rooted in philosophy, considering its methodological approach to the truth is based on
logical thinking so that its truth belongs to utopian truth. Then, this reason activity is
further developed by supporting it with the fact and data which will result in an empirical
science. History is the first science to receive rights of empirical science, considering it as
collections of writing resources. In exchange, the development of history will influence
the development of philosophy.
After specialization of science developing too far, there appeared a need to
integrate some sciences into one umbrella for the purpose of solving the complexity of
problems. The same case is with social science which can be viewed as integrated science
of the elements of social sciences so that in writing a book of social science should use an
integrated approach. For the same purpose of solving the complex problems, history
develop multi-dimensional approach.
As a sciences history can develop at least through this four following ways that
are: (1) the development of philosophy, (2) the development of theory of history, (3) the
development of other sciences, and (4) the development of history method.
References
Maarif, A Syafi’i, 2005a, “Kampus sebagai Pusat Kearifan”, Pewara, Oktober.
______________, 2005b, “Sejarah sebagai Pelayan Kehidupan”, Swara, Nopember.
______________, 1996, Ibn Khaldun dalam Pandangan Penulis Barat dan Timur, Jakarta: Gema Insani
Press.
9
Widja, I.G., 1988, Pengantar Ilmu Sejarah: Sejarah Dalam Perspektif Pendidikan, Semarang: Satya
Wacana.
Kartodirdjo, Sartono, 1982, Pemikiran dan Perkembangan Historiografi Indonesia: Suatu Alternatif,
Jakarta: Gramedia.
Al-Hilali, Muhammad Taqiunddin and M. Muhshin Khan, 1996, Interpretation of the Meaning of the Noble
Qur’an, Riyadh: Darussalam.
Nevis, Allan 1962, The Gateway of History, New York: Doubleday&Company.
Kuntowijoyo, 1999, Pengantar Ilmu Sejarah, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
10