Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Comparison Between Modern And Traditional Society
Comparison Between Modern And Traditional Society
Comparison Between Modern And Traditional Society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Comparison Between Modern And Traditional Society
Among the most famous breaks in social composure in American history is the 1938 broadcast of The War of the Worlds, a radio program based on the H.G. Wells novel of the same name. Despite at least four announcements made during the program that the performance was a work of fiction, the public panicked as they listened to what they firmly believed to be a factual broadcast of an actual Martian invasion. Almost since the moment the panic occurred, historians have put forward theories incorporating this event into our social history. It is frequently cited as proof of general American anxiety about the pending Second World War. Tension was high, and, according to historian Joanna Bourke, many people listening to The War of the Worlds broadcast thought that the Germans or Japanese had been mistaken for aliens (Bourke, 2006, p.184).
However, one of the challenges with using theoretical models to connect past events in an effort to make sense out of them, i.e. history, is that we can only look at them from our current shared reality, not from the shared reality of the people who experienced the events. Ludwick Fleck wrote,
Truth… is always, or almost always, completely determined within a thought style. One can never say that the same thought is true for A and false for B. If A and B belong to the same thought collective, the thought will be either true or false for both. But if they belong to different thought collectives, it will just not be the same thought! It must either be unclear to, or be understood differently by, one of them. (Erickson, 2005, p. 69)
What all of this means, is that our history serves us and only us. History is not absolutely and finally true; it can and often does lose meaning over time. A generation f...
... middle of paper ...
...t nebulous combination of events and theories is the stock and the historical cannon is the output. This historical cannon can cycle back around and be combined with new theories to make new history, or it can be forgotten. The peer review Carr describes serves as a feedback loop, keeping combinations of theories and events in line with, to use Fleck’s term, contemporary thought collectives. History, like any well functioning system, perpetuates itself. It changes over time, but history, the story we tell ourselves about who we are and how we got here, is as old as humanity itself.
Works Cited
Bourke, J. (2006). Fear: A Cultural History. United States of America: Shoemaker &
Hoard.
Carr, E. H. (1961) What is History?. New York: Vintage Books.
Erickson, M. (2005) Science, Culture and Society: Understanding Science in the 21st
Century. Malden, MA: Polity.
Michael C. C. Adams' book, The Best War Ever: America and World War II, attempts to dispel the numerous misconceptions of the Second World War. As the title suggests, Americans came out of the war with a positive view of the preceding five turbulent years. This myth was born from several factors. Due to the overseas setting of both theaters of the war, intense government propaganda, Hollywood's glamorization, and widespread economic prosperity, Americans were largely sheltered form the brutal truth of World War II. Even to this day, the generation of World War II is viewed as being superior in morality and unity. The popular illusion held that 'there were no ethnic or gender problems, families were happy and united, and children worked hard in school and read a great number of books.' (115)
... middle of paper ... ... While most media coverage appeared to be more inclined toward creating urban myths, the reality was atrocious. Works Cited: Brauer, Ralph.
It’s truly fascinating how there are so many different approaches to history, how so many different types of minds and schools of thought can come together to study the events of the world’s past. There are so many ways to approach what happened in our past, and the groups of historians previously mentioned are only a fraction of the actual number of different ways of researching and thinking that exists as it pertains to the study of history. History is in some ways, always a mystery, and all historians, regardless of schooling, training or biases, seek to accomplish one goal: to understand what occurred before us and why, and to use that knowledge to learn how the world was shaped into the world we live in today.
...xpect nor want historians to agree in their interpretations of the past, for then new discoveries would never be made and our knowledge would be limited. It is through this synthesis of knowledge and constant dialogue between historians that the most comprehensive representation of the Progressive Era, and ultimately history in general, is created.
History is more than a collection of facts from pastimes, or a one-sided story containing the “right” answer. History contains a narrative; however, this narrative combines historical narratives from different perspectives, in order to create an inclusive history. Unfortunately, this narrative is sometimes hidden by overpowering perspectives, and consequently, prevents other perspectives from being recognized. American history is argued as one of these overpowering perspectives, as it has portrayed history from a white American view point. This argument is not uncommon, nor is it exclusive to the United States. Most of the developed world has and overpowering perspective of history. However, it is important to use the building blocks found in less developed nations to reconstruct history, in order to represent a more inclusive narrative. Dr. Paul Ortiz’s,
History is the study of the past. It is the combination of many different interpretations divided over different languages, cultures, and individuals. It is “fragments of knowledge that we put together” (Bishop). With that said, I believe that new information will disturb the already unstable model of the historical past. This is demonstrated through history’s influence on our emotion and sense perception.
History is the investigation of occasions that have just gone through the stream of time (“1941,” 1). History specialists decipher occasions and after that procedure them into an account that tells circumstances and end results [2] . History can't be viewed in general, on the grounds that there is such a great amount of data to deal with. In this way, a student of history must pick and pick what to see at with a specific end goal to better comprehend history.
I am often asked Why do people study history? Is it because it makes people feel a strong connection to their ancestor? Or perhaps the thrill of uncovering lost knowledge drives history forward. History is a complex and delicate subject which unlike science there may not be just one answer so historians must continually question the “generally accepted truth.” By seeking knowledge through history, we as humans are forced to face our own personal biases by either putting them aside or using them as fuel to support one’s own hypothesis. The True historian will look beyond their opinions and cultural restrictions by collecting information from both sides and then determining the best course of action. During the twentieth century, there was a shift in idea on how historians should analyze and study history. Modern day historians study the past in hopes of better understanding the present. One technique historians use to narrow down specific events is by looking for tuning points or eras of major change that lead to a greater impact. One cataclysmic event that has recently become under great debate
In his short article “World History as a Way of Thinking” Eric Lane Martin, “…argue[s] that the most important things the field of world history has to offer the researcher, teacher, student, and general public are the conceptual tools required for understanding complex global processes and problems.” Anyone who follows the evening news or shops at Wal-mart, has encountered the processes and problems Martin speaks of. Our modern society puts pressure on a variety of citizens to grapple with and attempt to understand issues on a scale that moves beyond the local and national. History has long been a tool utilized by scholars, politicians and citizens to help them put current day happenings into context. That context has allowed for a deeper understanding of the present day. In an era when the issues cross national and regional boundaries the need for a different scale of history has become apparent. World history has emerged as a relatively new discipline within academia that is attempting to provide the context for large-scale processes and problems. As the field has grown a variety of authors, some historians, some from other fields, have attempted to write a history of the world. With such a daunting task how can we define success? How can we analyze the history that provides a true global perspective on processes and problems we face? By taking Martin’s two key characteristics of world history, one, it is defined by the kinds of questions it asks and two, it is defined by the problem-solving techniques it uses, we can analyze texts purporting to be world history and access their utility in providing context for the global processes and problems we face today.
Students often see no relationship between their own lives and the past. Our culture’s emphasis on the push forward towards a better, modern, or post-modern future makes history seem irrelevant to them (Poska). Many students breeze through school without taking a single glance at history. They pass it off as a useless class that they’ll never need, or they take it simply for the credits. Unfortunately, this is a skewed view of the subject b...
History is repetitive and that requires our constant vigilance to thus pay attention (Stearns). It is proven that in history those who do not st...
...nce historians only have a limited view of all the incidents created by forces and people. Despite this, new interpretations are constantly being formed from new evidence, and this will likely continue for many more years to come.
In Graham Swift’s Waterland, Tom Crick says, “Children, it was one of your number, a curly-haired boy called Price… who once… asserted roundly that history was ‘a fairy-tale’… ‘What matters… is the here and now. Not the past… The only important thing about history, I think, sir, is that it’s got to the point where it’s probably about to end’”(6,7). It is very likely that we all have come to a point in our education, at one time or another, where we have encountered sentiments similar to those of Price. In most schools the subject of history is treated more or less in the same way- as a recounting of events, an examination of how the past has led to the present. This seems to be a good definition at first glance, but perhaps it is lacking in that it fails to account for the “here and now”(6). In Waterland Graham Swift not only addresses the problem of the fears his students face in the here and now, and the prospect of a nightmarish future; but, he also gives an unlikely solution in Tom Crick’s theory of history as explanation and personal story.
"I once asked myself, how history was written. I said, "I have to invent it." When I wish as now to tell of critical incidents, persons, and events that have influenced my life and work, the true answer is all of the incidents were critical, all of the people influenced me, everything that happened and that is still happening influences me."
Russel B. Nye also shares similarities with McPhee in History, Meaning and Method, saying that "History is a response to the eternal desire of human beings to know about themselves." Nye believes that history is concerned with societies and the individuals who live in these societies. He emphasises the importance of people, their individual choices, the values they hold and the angles of vision by which they have looked at themselves and the world. It is important to look at history if one is to understand how and why men and women have acted together in society. Nye also shares the same view as Bullock in suggesting that "History has the special obligation to recall, reassess and re-interpret the past, bringing it to bear on the present and translating it into a form each new generation can use." Nye believes that history is a social science which requires hypotheses and observations. If we are to make proper use of history, historians have to arrange it in a way that makes it easy for us to identify the facts.