Search results

This occasional but substantial joumal, devoted by its title to the philosophy of history, will publish, we are told in an editorial note, material "principally in four areas: theories of history, cause, law, explanation, generalisation, determinism; historiography, studies of historians, historical figures and events which illuminate general historiographical problems; method of history, interpretation, selection of facts, objectivity, social and cultural implications of the historian's method; related disciplines, relationship of problems in historical theory and method to those of economic, psychological and other social sciences." The distinctions here drawn seem, on the whole, to be indicative rather than analytical: "determinism" is grouped a little oddly with its neighbours, and it is not quite clear how the third area ("method of history") is related either to the first or to the second; but all in all, there is little doubt what the province of a journal of philosophy of history is here taken to he be.To borrow words from the opening lines of the first contribution, an article entitled "History and Theory" by Sir Isaiah Berlin (a member of the editorial committee), "history is what historians do"; and philosophy of history is a mode of enquiry into what it is and how they do it. This philosophy is concerned with the explanation rather than the explicandum; its tools are analytical and its statements second-order statements. Some exceptions to this view can be found in the issues so far published and there may be more to come.

AbstractThis article explores unexamined links between psychic and political theories of trauma to investigate the constitution of victims deserving and undeserving of reparation as they emerge in the context of the Holocaust, Hiroshima, and the Nuremberg and Tokyo War Tribunals. While genocide and nuclear catastrophe oriented the world imagination toward the specter of planetary annihilation, the "final solution" and the atomic bombings also cleave from one another in significant ways. In the space of postwar Europe, the history of the Holocaust is settled: Nazis were perpetrators and Jews were victims. In contrast, in the space of postwar Asia, there was and continues to be little historical consensus as to who were the victims and who were the perpetrators. As such, this article investigates how the uneven distribution of trauma across different geopolitical spaces and times carves out a privileged zone of exhausted and victimized humanity, with significant implications for addressing the injuries of violated human beings in Europe and elsewhere. Throughout, this article examines how psychoanalytic approaches to the history of the traumatized subject supplement the subject of Cold War history in search of an impossible historical consensus.

"Her book takes us on a journey back to the basics of conducting a thorough and informative social history and is an account of what a real social history involves...I recommend this book not only for the novice but also for all clinicians who want an edge on how to accumulate more pertinent information concerning their patients and to guide their treatment." -PSYCCRITIQUES In the mental health and human service professions, taking a social history assessment marks the start of most therapeutic interventions. Social History Assessment is the first resource to offer practical guidance about in