↓ Skip to main content

The Axial Age and the Problems of the Twentieth Century: Du Bois, Jaspers, and Universal History

Overview of attention for article published in The American Sociologist, March 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
The Axial Age and the Problems of the Twentieth Century: Du Bois, Jaspers, and Universal History
Published in
The American Sociologist, March 2015
DOI 10.1007/s12108-015-9254-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

John D. Boy

Abstract

The axial age debate has put big questions of social and cultural change back on the agenda of sociology. This paper takes this development as an occasion to reflect on how social thought works with (and against) nineteenth-century intellectual traditions in its efforts to understand history on a macro scale. Karl Jaspers, who initially formulated the axial age thesis in The Origin and Goal of History, revised the Hegelian account of world history by broadening the scope of the narrative to encompass all civilizations participating in the events of the first millennium BCE that saw the rise of major philosophical and religious traditions. However, his account, like the earlier philosophical accounts he seeks to improve upon, privileges cognitive developments over material practices and social interactions, and as such offers little to those seeking to make sense of how cultural patterns interact with others and spread. Here another social theorist engaging with Hegel, W. E. B. Du Bois, provides a helpful contrast. His account of the development of double-consciousness in "Of Our Spiritual Strivings," the opening chapter of The Souls of Black Folk, helps us to understand experiences of encounter and the perduring historical effects they may have. Du Bois' relational theory reminds us of the importance of unpacking abstractions and understanding processes in terms of social interactions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 3 19%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Master 2 13%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 2 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 6 38%
Philosophy 2 13%
Arts and Humanities 2 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 2 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 March 2019.
All research outputs
#19,495,804
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from The American Sociologist
#221
of 266 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,403
of 289,955 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The American Sociologist
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 266 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 289,955 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.