Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Example bias in history
Different views about history
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Example bias in history
In Carr’s article, The Historian and His Facts, and Causation in History, he states that the study and interpretation of history reflects our own position in time and what we can take out of it as a society. It’s all about the viewpoint of the individual researching or telling the event. Carr supports this idea by stating that, everyone draws their own conclusions. This idea of having your own conclusions is the case for writing and recording history as a historian from the beginning of human history. Every historian has a bias or a viewpoint on a historical topic and event. Some historians focus only on one side of the event while, others focus on multiple sides, but pick which one they believe is a bit better. Some historians only focus on the human aspects of an event and reach the conclusion that only humans drive history. On the other end of the spectrum a historian could only focus on the environmental factors of an event and reach the conclusion it was only that, that shaped history. Carr refers to this idea as “Necessarily selective” in which they pick what they want to write...
Historians can either disagree or agree into a situation to find the meaning of outcomes. Certainly the past had happened the way it is therefore history is always explained from other people’s perspective. The perspective of historians such as Bernard Baiylin or Gary Nash can relate to the American Revolution, however Baiyln has a stronger argument because he expands the topic, gives great information that readers can pick up right away, and has reliable sources while Nash’s argument is weak because of difficult wording, relies on common data, and lacks of direct facts that relate to his topic.
The education of an author on their topic is the biggest contributor to their reliability; having enough prior knowledge and background information on a subject is crucial when providing a historical analysis. An author’s personal background is of great importance as well, because their personal heritage and beliefs may lead to bias and misrepresentation of information, which removes all credibility of them and/or their work as source. Partiality, favoritism, and/or prejudice towards a specific demographic can create a blurred line between what is fact and what is opinion, which in turn can allow for personal assessments to be presented as arguments and facts even though they have been influenced to a great extent by prior thoughts and opinions.
John Edgar Wideman’s essay “Our Time” presents us the story of his brother Robby. The essay is unique because Wideman uses the “voices” of his brother Robby, his mother, and himself to convey the different perspectives of each person. The author uses the three different points of view in an attempt to express his emotions, and what he was going through while trying to understand the motives behind Robby’s transgressions. Wideman articulates that choices in life are often difficult to make, and other people will be unable to understand the reasons behind a particular choice. In addition to telling Robby’s story, Wideman includes the problems he faced as a writer in order to tell the story from his brother’s point of view.
Second, the historian must place himself within the existing historical debate on the topic at hand, and state (if not so formulaically as is presented here) what he intends to add to or correct about the existing discussion, how he intends to do that (through examining new sources, asking new questions, or shifting the emphasis of pre-existing explanations), and whether he’s going to leave out some parts of the story. This fulfills the qualities of good history by alerting readers to the author’s bias in comparison with the biases of other schools of scholarship on the topic, and shows that the author is confident enough in his arguments to hold them up to other interpreta...
...reak down of selection, slanting by the use of emphasis, slanting by the selection of facts, and charged words can be used as guide to spot bias. By using Birk and Birk as a guide it easy to identify and categorize the bias within Jamieson’s essay. Birk and Birk write “If we carefully examine the ways of thoughts and language, we see that any knowledge that comes to us through words has been subjected to the double screening of the principle of selection and the slanting of language…”(227). It is this very principle that reminds us to carefully observe the information that we receive and make an effort to ensure we balance the information that we divulge.
the representation of history could also have been done in such a manner where the whites and
To study history, the facts and information must be passed down. To do so, historians record the information in textbooks and other nonfiction works. Whether or not the historians retell facts or construct their own version of history is debatable. History can be percieved as being “constructed” by the historians due to their bias, elimination of controversy, strive for entertainment, and neglect to update the information.
“History is always written by the winners. When two cultures clash, the loser is obliterated, and the winner writes the history books-books which glorify their own cause and disparage the conquered foe. As Napoleon once said, 'What is history, but a fable agreed upon?” -Dan Brown.
Upon reviewing the article Reading Primary Sources, there are several themes in which I, as the reader, have discovered present throughout. First and foremost, Kathryn Walbert consistently supports the theme: analyzing the past is an essential step to understanding why humanity is where it is today. History, by Google definition, is both "the study of past events, particularly in human affairs," and "the whole series of past events connected with someone or something." In essence, history is a connected stream of events that leads up to now. It is through primary sources that historians have been able to create factual records of the past. The question is, why? As a species, mankind is defined by where they come from; this is history. Walbert discusses the importance of primary sources, stating that "historians must rely on records left behind" to understand the people
This paper will dispute that scientific beliefs are not the right way to accept a belief and it will question if we should let one accept their rights to their own beliefs. In Williams James article Will to Believe, we accept his perspective on how we set and fix our beliefs. This paper will first outline his overview on the argument that someone does not choose their belief but rather one just has them. Following, it will outline my perspective on how we set our beliefs and agreement with purse. Then it will explain how other methodologies such as science cannot conclude to one’s true beliefs. Science has been seen as a way to perceive life and taken to consideration as the truth. This paper should conclude that humans define ourselves by
As Berger says, “the art of the past is being mystified because a privileged minority is striving to invent a history which can retrospectively justify the role of the ruling classes, and such a justification can no longer make sense in modern terms” (157). The upper class mystifies us to stay in control; without being able to see things in our own way, we are being deprived from our right to understanding ourselves and placing ourselves in a role of society.
The study of history is sometimes regarded as both an art and a science because it uses crude facts and pairs them up, on most cases, with intuition to create and accurate description of the past. In history, collection and verification of evidence must be approached with scientific foundations, or arguments that prove to be facts. When historians gain this shared knowledge, they move on to observe and use deductive reasoning by means of intuition, and thus gaining the ability to create knowledge claims in the field and explain patterns of historical behavior. Historians use a mix of science with their own interpretation to create a historical method that produces a reliable conclusion that helps explain the history of the world. Without intuition, imagination, or interpretation, historians would be left with little to no room to interpret the cold, hard and elusive facts of the distant past. On the other hand with no facts whatsoever, history would be nothing more than a made up story. Historians must test their personal knowledge, and recently acquired shared knowledge; to evaluate, validity, credibility, reliability, cultures, individuals, certainty, and
"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."
...eas of knowledge has already been tainted with bias and selection as stated above. There is merely a slight chance of the knowledge not having any hints of bias and selection. In spite of this, of course, knowledge can still be objective and impartial in nature, which is good since the people will be provided with complete accounts and information. Nonetheless, the sheer amount of knowledge may render it useless, as well as clouding the truth. Whereas, knowledge with hints of bias and selection may be subjective and representative, but, on a brighter note, the knowledge may be more specific and better evaluated. Better evaluated in the sense that a debate between different people under the influence of bias and selection can contribute to the growth of knowledge. That is why, at the end of the day, knowledge with hints of bias and selection is still worth knowing.
Bias stems from people’s nature to judge and have their own opinions towards a topic. Sometimes historians, and people in general, are faced with conformation bias, in which they are more prone to focus on one set of events and disregard the others. For example, once I went to a football game where my favorite team was playing and they won the game. When my mother asked me how the game went, and I told her how my team won. I may choose to ignore the other team’s loss or the details of their play.