History and Philosophy of the Humanities: An Introduction

by Michiel Leezenberg, Gerard de Vries

The humanities include disciplines as diverse as literary theory, linguistics, history, film studies, theology, and philosophy. Do these various fields of study have anything in common that distinguishes them from, say, physics or sociology? The tripartite division between the natural sciences, the social sciences and the humanities may seem self-evident, but it only arose during the course of the 19th century and is still contested today.

History and Philosophy of the Humanities: An Introduction presents a reasoned overview of the conceptual and historical backgrounds of the humanities. In four sections, it discusses:
- the most influential views on scientific knowledge from Aristotle to Thomas Kuhn;
- the birth of the modern humanities and its relation to the natural and social sciences;
- the various methodological schools and conceptual issues in the humanities;
- several themes that set the agenda for current debates in the humanities: critiques of modernity; gender, sexuality and identity; and postcolonialism.

Thus, it provides students in the humanities with a comprehensive understanding of the backgrounds of their own discipline, its relation to other disciplines, and the state of the art of the humanities at large.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, History, School, Science, Collections, Reference

396 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2001

About the author

Michiel Leezenberg teaches in the Philosophy department and in the MA programme 'Islam in the Modern World' at the University of Amsterdam.

Reviews

[Kyo · Rating 2 out of 5]

I didst it

[Roos · Rating 1 out of 5]

dit boek gaf mij iets wat omschreven kan worden als 'algehele malaise'.

[Emma]

Sorry heel cringe maar wel eerste studieboek die ik volledig heb gelezen

[Kirsten · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tsja... Nou ja... Ik heb het uit? Laten we het daar maar bij houden. Je hoort wel van me als ik gezakt ben voor het tentamen


EDIT: ik had een 8 HAHAHAHAHA

[Milan]

Heel trots op mezelf dat ik deze uit heb

[Araik]

Heerlijk vak

[Zeehondkoe]

ik had het niet gedacht maar ik heb het toch helemaal uit zitten lezen 👍

[Anouck · Rating 3 out of 5]

I had to read this book for a bachelor course. Honestly, I find it hard to judge this book, because my opinion of it is so heavily influenced by the context in which I had to read it.

Let me start off by saying I am absolutely fascinated by philosophy, and I was somewhat acquainted with the subject matter before the course began. For that exact reason it was not a punishment to read this book. If anything, I felt like I was really learning something valuable. Contrary to some of the books you have to read in college, I always came away from this one feeling like a wiser person for having read it.

Be that as it may, the reading load for this course was very high. And no matter how interesting something is, if you are made to read 180 pages a week, you will soon grow rather tired of it. That was definitely the case with this book for me. On top of that, some of the philosophers in this work (Foucault, Saussure, Derrida) are rather complicated in their own right. I found myself re-reading sentences or entire paragraphs non-stop because I couldn't immediately understand what was being said. And if you have to do that for 180 pages every week, with a book that has such a high information density, you will really get fed up with it.

Altogether I have mixed opinions. I am no expert and thus in no position to say anything about the contents of the book, and the extent to which what's said is true or approaching truth.
I learned a lot from it, and found it very clear in most cases. But the information density was very high and difficult concepts, names and definitions were scrambled across the chapters. Maybe it would have been better to divide the book in chapters per philosopher.

[Ashley Thijssing · Rating 2 out of 5]

Stom.

[Liza · Rating 1 out of 5]

unfortunately I had to read this entirely.

1/5☆

[Odile · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was my course book for philosophy of science in the second year at the University of Amsterdam. Not a big surprise, since the teacher was author #1. I found the book adequate, but nothing more. Dryly written, though it touches the important central points. The class was worse: a rehashing of what we should have read in the book, for those who hadn't. Needless to say, I stopped attending after week one and passed anyway.

I would recommend Rens Bod's 'De Vergeten Wetenschappen' [ http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/99... ] for a more interesting coursebook for the history of the humanities. You can do Popper, Kuhn, etc. in one or two classes to the side for good measure.

[Ruby · Rating 3 out of 5]

To be honest, I don't quite understand why people seem to hate this book as much as they do. The authors are very clear about what they wants achieve with this book, which is to give a very broad overview of the science of philosophy, particularly with regards to humanities. I think they succeed: the book explains everything quite clearly and it is easy to read.

[Orlando Ruiz · Rating 1 out of 5]

kutste boek ooit. ik weet nog steeds niet hoe ik dit vak heb gehaald

[Tessa · Rating 1 out of 5]

Ik vond het erg moeilijk. Het duurde heel lang voordat ik het snapte en had ook echt het hoorcollege van mijn docent nodig. De inhouddichtheid is voor mij veel te groot en er worden te veel lastige woorden gebruikt. Het zou een beter boek zijn geweesst, als het woordgebruik al anders was.

[Rijk · Rating 3 out of 5]

lees je niet voor de lol

[Romy Voeten · Rating 2 out of 5]

Een hoop filosofische denkbeelden compact (en vaak met lastige woorden) uitgeschreven. Geeft je wel een goed beeld van de filosofische ontwikkelingen vanaf de 17de eeuw.

[Monique]

Soort van uitgelezen

[Atimia Atimia · Rating 2 out of 5]

2 sterren is niet zozeer een kritiek op de auteurs, de informatie was adequaat genoeg voor het doel van het boek. Wetenschapsfilosofie voor geesteswetenschappen is echter niet een geweldig boeiend onderwerp. Ik had 100 extra pagina's niet erg gevonden zolang deze gevuld zouden zijn met de ethiek van enkele besproken filosofen, bijvoorbeeld. Maar goed, het rating systeem gaat niet over de kwaliteit van een boek, het is enkel een maatstaf van hoe ''leuk'' je het vond, dus bij deze, no hard feelings.

[Quill · Rating 3 out of 5]

I had to read this for a philosophy course for my uni.

I had no prior interest in philosophy. If anything, I thought it was boring. But this book did a great job of making it interesting. It gave a very comprehensible and concise overview of philosophy as a subject within the humanities throughout the ages and I ended up enjoying it way more than I thought I would.

I read this book three times, finishing it for the third time, right now; exactly 5 minutes before I have an exam about this book. Wish me luck.

[Maud van Lier · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good overview of the philosophy of sciences. For all the people out there who are obliged to do this course, it will help if you actually read it! The same goes for philosophy students and students of English. All the major thinkers are being mentioned with a clear explanation regarding their work and thoughts.

[Eva_812 · Rating 3 out of 5]

Moest het boek lezen/leren voor het vak Wetenschapsfilosofie. Op zich een interessant boek, maar wel veel lezen, dus heb ook deels samenvattingen gelezen omdat er zo ontzettend veel informatie en namen in voor komen dat het overzicht makkelijk een beetje kwijt te raken is. De begrippenlijst achterin is wel heel chill!

[Linde · Rating 2 out of 5]

Course book on the major Western philosophers ranging from Aristotle to Kuhn, Nietzche and Popper. It's basically theory about a lot of other theories. Reading is somewhat slow due to complicated sentences.

[Charlotte Houwing · Rating 3 out of 5]

(De herziene editie gelezen, maar staat nog niet op GR) Taai boek... Maar ook een heel taai onderwerp. Na heel vaak opnieuw lezen begrijp ik het eindelijk. Snap niet goed waarom de auteurs voor deze opbouw hebben gekozen.

[Edmundo · Rating 3 out of 5]

General overview of the main ideas surrounding the humanities and its semi-related fields and historical disciplines. It was a terrible slog to read. I am not that interested in most of the authors and topics covered in this book. Yuck!

[Mizumi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting at places, but hard to get through overall. It discusses a lot of theories and tends to leave it at that.

[Kaj Peters · Rating 3 out of 5]

Zal het niet zo snel voor mijn plezier uit de kast pakken, maar het dient zijn doel als didactisch middel. Helder, overzichtelijk en het weet moeilijke onderwerpen enigszins inzichtelijk te maken.

[Eva · Rating 4 out of 5]

Op de meeste punten gewoon helder, en de samenhang tussen verschillende auteurs wordt goed aangegeven.

[Lee Martens · Rating 3 out of 5]

Gelezen voor school. Duidelijk geschreven, maar wat langdradig soms.

[Paul Wouters · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent overview, and historical analysis, of the main philosophical approaches in the humanities and social sciences.

[Aleksandra]

i was this close to finishing it before my exam but i read the majority of it so it WILL count