Summary
Overview
A comprehensive interview with historian Jörg Baberowski discussing his approach to history, Russian politics and the Ukraine war, democracy and populism, and the nature of power and meaning in human societies. The conversation explores philosophical questions about objectivity in historical work, the relationship between rhetoric and truth, Soviet history, Putin's regime, and challenges facing liberal democracy today.
The Nature of Historical Work and Objectivity
Baberowski explains his approach to history as one of wonder and inquiry into how people lived in different times and contexts. He argues against the idea of neutral objectivity in historical work, emphasizing instead that historians must be transparent about their subjective perspectives and methodological approaches. He distinguishes between achieving objectivity through reproducible methods versus claiming a neutral standpoint, which he considers impossible and even dangerous when historians mistake their subjective views for neutrality.
- Baberowski studies Eastern European history with focus on understanding how people lived in different contexts and cultures
- Historians must reflect on their subjective positions and cultural baggage rather than claiming neutrality
- Objectivity in history comes from transparent methods that others can verify, not from a neutral standpoint
- Rhetoric and storytelling ability are decisive factors in whether historical arguments are found plausible
" Ich wundere mich gerne. Ich wundere mich, warum machen Menschen Dinge, die ganz eigenartig sind, die merkwürdig sind, die ich so nicht tun würde und die andere auch nicht so tun. "
" In die Falle, in die viele Journalisten und Historiker hineinlaufen, ist, dass sie ihre subjektiven Auffassungen für neutral halten. Es kann nicht funktionieren. "
Rhetoric, Science, and German Academic Culture
The discussion examines how German academic culture differs from Anglo-American traditions, particularly regarding the role of rhetoric and storytelling in scholarly work. Baberowski explains that German academia emphasizes appearing neutral and avoiding personal voice, while English-speaking traditions embrace essay writing and narrative. He traces this to the influence of natural sciences and argues that German scholarship's rejection of rhetoric actually obscures rather than eliminates subjectivity.
- German scientific culture teaches students to write in a boring, impersonal style that avoids the word 'I'
- English-speaking countries teach essay writing and storytelling as normal parts of academic work
- The separation of literature and history occurred with the rise of exact sciences demanding scientist self-removal
- Historian Theodor Mommsen won the Nobel Prize for Literature when no distinction was made between history and literature
" Wissenschaftlich schreiben heißt, langweilig schreiben. Möglichst unverständlich zu schreiben, nicht an den Leser zu denken, sondern möglichst wenig von der eigenen Person in den Text zu bringen. "
📚 5 more sections below
Sign up to unlock the complete summary with all insights, key points, and quotes
Get this summary + all future Jung & Naiv episodes in your inbox
100% Free • Unsubscribe Anytime
Sign up now and we'll send you the complete summary of this episode, plus get notified when new Jung & Naiv episodes are released—delivered straight to your inbox within minutes.