Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Infuence by media on US history
History has a relation with science
History has a relation with science
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Infuence by media on US history
The claim is true but it has its exceptions,since both areas of knowledge contribute to understand the past in order to create the future ; evidence is the essence of both fields. History has clearly developed into an area of monumental importance. History is merely a compilation of evidence left. Historians beat history into something acceptable from mainstream values. This degradation of knowledge is also apparent in both human and natural sciences. This quote is examined and it is evident that both history and science change, first distorting the facts in order to shape it into the conventional opinion, and slowly change as society is changing. It is important to keep in mind that there are at the very least grains of truth in almost every historical account or scientific breakthrough.
History is not the past, history is constantly being updated and depends on the extent of the perspective from which it is studied. Try to imagine what it would be like to live in a society where there was absolutely no knowledge of the past. Everything that is written is based on past evidence. Differences in historical interpretations can also be influenced by contextual changes over time. It can be argued that we are able to look back on events and re-evaluate them objectively. As Reuben Abel stated,"History is far from being exclusively scientific or factual; it is also in large part creative...The historian, like the novelist, tells a story..." (174). Each historian assembles concrete sets of evidence, such as primary sources written by relevant people of the time. Each historian assembles a theory linking documents together with the events that are supposed to have occurred. I have seen first hand generations and their differences influen...
... middle of paper ...
...ally made through the process of reasoning and decision makings. Without any decisions that were made in history, none of the events would have happened to be recorded. There are different ways of reasoning; for example, in relation to history, the way Western textbooks reason the colonization of Africa and the way African textbooks reason the colonization would be different. In Western textbooks it would mostly explain how the western colonies came to Africa to civilize and help develop the country. However in African textbooks would likely explain how the westerns invaded their land and forced intensive labors upon african citizens. Most cases with this issue of reasoning to tell history and is claiming something is true because it cannot be proven wrong. It can be viewed that both countries are using double standards to excuse or support their own nations.
When I was in High School, my history teacher once said to me, “history is written by the victors.” In other words, those who win, decide how they will be remembered. For instance, the history of the United States and their interactions with Native Americans. Old (bias) history textbooks will tell us you how the white European “discovered” America and saved the native “savage” from himself or herself. However, this old way of thinking, only allows us one perspective. We never hear the Native Americans’ point of view. This is why historians, and the work they do, are so important to our society. Historians depend on evidence to develop a narrative and arguments about the past. Yet the arguments that they develop are strictly based on the primary
The study of past events have been a common practice of mankind since the verbal telling of stories by our ancestors. William Cronon, in his article “Why the Past Matters,” asserts that the remembrance of the past “keeps us in place.” Our individual memories and experiences shape how we act in our daily lives. In addition to influencing us at an individual level, our collective history binds us together as a society. Without knowing where we have been or what we have experienced, it is nearly impossible to judge progress or know which courses of action to pursue. The goal of the historian is to analyze and explain past events, of which they rarely have firsthand memory of, and apply the gained knowledge to make connections with current and future events.
Investigating the Extent to Which Historians Can Be Objective ‘You have reckoned that history ought to judge the past and to instruct the contemporary world as to the future. The present attempt does not yield to that high office. It will merely tell you how it really was’ - Leopold Von Ranke ‘There are no facts, only interpretations’ – Nietzsche Here we encounter two diametrically opposed views concerning objectivity. It can be argued that “true” objectivity cannot exist, as history is more exposed to differing interpretations than any other discipline and to be “factual”, dispassionate or truly objective would be at best unrealistic and at worst impossible. Historians, in their selective analysis of the past on the basis of surviving historical records and evidence, draw conclusions, which must necessarily be subject to their own individual interpretations – interpretations that are in turn subject to the historians’ own individual ideologies.
A beginning group of historians to take a closer look at is the empiricists. The empiricists have a very strictly factual and logical view on history and how to examine it. They believe that past is both “observable and verifiable” and that through adherence to three strict principles, the past can be represented objectively and accurately. (Green, Troup 3) The three aforementioned principles can be summed up as: meticulously examining historical evidence and verifying the evidence with references, making sure the research is completely impartial and free of biases and prejudices, and using an inductive, or observational, method of reasoning. (Green, Troup 3) The empiricists seek to find universal historical truths through objective research and sticking to the facts.
Winston Churchill once said, "The farther back you can look, the farther forward you are likely to see. " History is a part of life, no matter where a person may look. There is history in every family, every building, every friendship, and especially every book. In the book One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest by Ken Kesey, the ward that houses all the patients holds an endless amount of history. Before Kesey wrote the book, he spent time in a mental ward to gain experience.
I found it very intriguing that I read three different books discussing history and how it functions. All of the authors had a different view on the most important functions of history. The beginning of “A Pocket Guide to Writing in History” asks a great question. Why should we bother studying the past in an increasingly future-oriented society? A Pocket Guide to Writing in History used a more open view and did not focus on the statistics as much of the other two authors. A Pocket Guide to Writing in History discusses the importance of seeing our world through different eyes. How a historian should ask questions and use a variety of critical thinking skills to have s better understanding of people, places, and events throughout history. A Pocket Guide to Writing in History emphasized that a
Intellectual history as a discipline and as a way of thinking about the world has a history. Ideas and ways of thinking and ways of understanding the world have a history. Considering the history of human achievement whether we are talking about political history, economic history, military history, and gender history nothing compares in raw measure to our living history. This history includes what we think is possible or what is impossible. How we think about the world determines our relationship to it. Human thought has a history, which the way we think in modern times is not the way people have understood it or thought about it. Humanity changes how we think about the natural world, what is out there to be known? What is the stuff of the world? Why things happen? What is good evidence?...
Before Kuhn’s book was written, the commonly held position by scientists and philosophers of science, such as Mach and Otswald , about the structure of science; was that it involved linear progression as a result of an incremental accumulation of knowledge from the activities undertaken by members of the scientific community. They thought that as generations of scientists observed more and more, their understanding of a particular scientific fact would become better refined through an ever growing stockpile of facts, theories and methods. The aim of the historian of science would be to pin point the man and the moment in time a further discovery was made; whilst also describing the obstacles that inhibited scientific progression.
In essence, “history” is simply a combination of stories: recounts of events from multiple points of view. This is especially true when talking about events before the 21st century and the invention of cameras, and video/audio recorders. The only available information we have about the medieval period is from the writings of people from that time period, people who we now call historians. It is natural for our personal lives to affect our vision of the world, and thus easy to see why many of the writings we have about the medieval time period are strongly influenced by their author’s personal experiences. This is very obvious in the different versions of the story of King Arthur.
a nonhistorical or unverifiable story handed down by tradition from earlier times and popularly accepted as historical. history past down by tridision telling of peviuse events. legonds are a way to explane the unexpalnanle that can not seen touched semelt heard tasted. In some culchers suchas the intuits navao. history is witen or rewighten by the winners.
“Scientific knowledge is not inevitable” (Andrew Irvine). There is no guarantee that scientific progress would keep increasing. As long as people have the belief to live better, the scientific progress is not essential or necessary to exist. Progress of science and technology is a key factor in promoting the development of productive forces. The history of human civilization has fully proved this point. As research, ancient people to the natural forces that extreme lack of understanding, when they are faced the thunder lightning, floods, volcanic eruptions these natural scene, they are terrified. In order to find the strength to survive rely on primitive religion produced. Several of religious that domination of the human mind for thousands of years, which long confined ignorance of human wisdom. Scientific technology as a knowledge system is a powerful spiritual force, it helped people to keep the internal laws of the world know the real face and overcome to get rid of all outdated fallacious thing. It also does not worship any idols superstitious that always gifted elimination inferior and always full of innovation and creativity. This inherent ethos of science and technology would inevitably lead people to the way of thinking of
What is history? History is the analysis and interpretation of the past. History allows us to study both continuity and change over time. It helps to explain how we have changed throughout time. Part of history is using pieces of evidence to interpret and revisit the past. Examples of evidence include written documents, photographs, buildings, paintings, and artifacts. Is history important? When looking at what the definition of history entails, it is clear to see history is in fact, important.
History is a series of important past events that connect with something. History is what makes people make better decisions. There are many definitions of history and everyone has their own.
Now that I had one semester of History of Science, I feel that something should change and that all objective classes are worthless without a little influence of humanity. It matters to me because scientists and professors should give more importance to History of Science when forming new scientists; first, because it would avoid falling in the same pitfalls of the past, and second, because more than science, when discussing History, we can reflect about our society, the origin of our problems, and take a good perspective of what is coming next. It is sad to know that women and some “minorities” still do not have the same chances of completing a graduation or reaching a doctorate, but it would be still sadder knowing that no one is talking about it. I am not saying that talking about it will solve anything, but it is, for sure, the first step towards changing. Words have power, it is true, but it was those with action who wrote
I define history as important events that have happened in the past, and the ones that are presently happening. At some time or another everything will be considered history. History tells a story, whether it’s written, painted, carved, or sung; a collection of events that someone explains to you that is usually important.