AN APOLOGIA FOR THEORETICAL HISTORY In memory of Sir Karl Raimund Popper 1 NIKOLAI S. ROZOV ABSTRACT Karl Popper’s critique of theoretical history remains formidable but contains serious flaws. Popper held erroneous views about the practice of the natural sciences and created overly severe strictures for theoretical statements in the social sciences. General theory and general theoretical statements play a legitimate role in the social sciences. Merton has promoted middle-range theories and models and Lakatos multiple ontologies. One can answer Popper’s criticisms of either the impossibility or triviality of long-term historical laws by searching for stable constellations of local or middle-range laws rather than a uni- versal law. Moreover, the successful use in the social sciences of various types of scales of measurement rather than an absolute scale shows that quantitative analysis is possible in history. Investigators need to find the boundaries, the frameworks of feasibility, in which historical trends and laws operate. Popper’s maximalism plays into the irrationalist trends that he himself deplored. If historical investigators and theoreticians set appropri- ate goals for theoretical history, they can practice their discipline responsibly and find meanings, if not a single meaning, in history. Discussions between philosophers and historians about objects of mutual con- cern commonly have two curious characteristics. On the one hand, one is struck by the vast differences in their thinking, not only about problems of historical cognition and the essential meaning of human history, but in the very style of their thought and language. Not infrequently such differences provoke rather vexatious mutual incomprehension. On the other hand, historians and philoso- phers unite in surprising, indeed touching accord in negation of rational and the- oretical approaches to history: a diapason ranging from vehement criticism to scornful dismissal. It is not difficult to find reasons for this, for instance, in the history of the Soviet bloc. Historians, not only in Russia but elsewhere, grew accustomed during “the epoch of historical materialism” and its political dogmas to shielding their personal dignity and scholarly integrity by devoting themselves 1. This article was written while Sir Karl Popper was still alive. He died on September 17, 1994 after a long illness. Popper, who so strongly influenced thinking about the philosophy of history, him- self now belongs to the history of philosophy. It might be an interesting exercise to try to measure his influence on recent history through political leaders who valued his ideas. Although critical of some of Popper’s ideas, I dedicate my own thoughts on theoretical history to him who formulated such a formidable challenge to it.