Danziger (1994) distinguished between the insider-scientist and the outsider-historian models for the history of psychology. The present paper contends that since in psychology history has a contemporary relevance, there is a place for insider history in the discipline; hence, a mixed model is appropriate. Issue is taken with Danziger's view of insider history as inherently celebratory. It is finally argued that it is doubtful if critical history bridges the gap between the two historiographical models.
Brock, A. (1995). An interview with Kurt Danziger. Cheiron Newsletter, 13, 4-9.
2.
Danziger, K. (1994). Does the history of psychology have a future?Theory & Psychology, 4, 467-484.
3.
Forman, P. (1991). Independence, not transcendence, for the historian of science. Isis, 82, 71-86.
4.
Klant, J.J. (1987). Filosofie van de economische wetenschappen [Philosophy of economics]. Leiden: Nijhoff.
5.
Mayr, E. (1990). When is historiography whiggish?Journal of the History of Ideas, 51, 301-309.
6.
Pickstone, I.V. (1995). Past and present knowledges in the practice of the history of science. History of Science, xxxiii, 203-224.
7.
Rappard, J. F. H. van (1990). In praise of Problemgeschichte. In W. J. Baker, M. E. Hyland, R. van Hezewijk, & S. Terwee (Eds.), Recent trends in theoretical psychology (Vol. II, pp. 317-325). New York: Springer.
8.
Rappard, J. F. H. van (1993). History in psychology. Psychologie und Geschichte, 4, 187-196.
9.
Rappard, J. F. H. van (1995). Geschiedenis of verleden tijd? [History or past tense?]Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie, 50, 15-19.
10.
Rappard, J. F. H. van (1996). Meta matters: A comment on Agatti's proposal on the identity of theoretical psychology. Theory & Psychology, 6, 293-300.
11.
Swerdlov, N.M. (1993). Montucla's legacy: The history of the exact sciences. Journal of the History of Ideas, 54, 299-328.
12.
Wertheimer, M. (1980). Historical research-why? In J. Brozek & L. J. Pongratz (Eds.), Historiography of modern psychology (pp. 3-23). Toronto: Hogrefe.
