Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Objectivity in History
New historicism essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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. The
fact that history is constantly being rewritten is testimony to the
impossibility of attaining “true” objectivity.
On the other hand, “true” subjectivity would constitute a threat to
history itself as a discipline – the logical outcome of this would be
to grant every historian his or her own perspective, no matter how out
of synch with the “truth” it might be. The moral entanglement
resulting from such an approach is not difficult to imagine.
This essay will attempt to examine (some) historian’s views on
objectivity, within these two extremes, but the limited word count
necessitates the exclusion of others (White, Collingwood).
Can objective “facts” exist in history? Even whe...
... middle of paper ...
...reflections on
the present state of historical study Cambridge University Press,
1991
Gooch, G. P: History and Historians in the Nineteenth Century
Longmans, 1952 (Includes a chapter on Leopold Von Ranke)
Jenkins, Keith: On ‘What is History’: From Carr and Elton to Rorty and
White Routledge, 1995
Marwick, Arthur: The Nature of History Macmillan, 1970
Zinn, Howard: The Politics of History University of Illinois Press,
1990
---------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Elton, G.R: Return to Essentials – Some reflections on the present
state of historical study Cambridge University Press, 1991 (P. 43)
[2] Zinn, H: The Politics of History University of Illinois Press,
1990 (P.10-11)
[3] Carr, E.H: What is History Penguin, 1990 (P. 37)
[4] Carr (P. 107)
What is history? Many believe that history is what is read in textbooks, or what is seen on the news. If Susan Griffin were asked that question, she would probably argue that history is much more than that. It is about the minds and souls of the people who went through the historical event, not simply what happened. In her essay, Griffin incorporates stories of people from totally different backgrounds, and upbringings, including herself, all to describe their account of one time period. Each person’s history is somehow connected with the next person’s, and each story contr...
Greer, Cora. "Competing Perspectives on the Past in U.S. History Textbooks." AP Central. CollegeBoard, 3 Nov. 2009. Web. 12 May 2014.
In “Historian as Citizen (1966)” Howard Zinn first codifies his views of an opinion based activist scholar in terms of a historian. The first type of historian that he introduces is the mainstream version of the historian, “traditionally, he is passive observer, one who looks for sequential patterns in the past as a guide to the future (…) but without participating himself in attempts to change the pattern or tidy the d...
... complete and satisfying history is to read multiple sources and to inquire into the history of the writing of history on a topic – that is, the progression over time of ways of thinking about a conflict like the English Civil War, or the different interpretations and motivations of different schools of interpretation. History is a subtle discipline, where interpretations are never finally ruled to have been right or wrong as theorems in the physical sciences have been. An historical account tells us as much about the environment and particular philosophy of the historian as it does about the event or change it takes as its topic. The criteria presented here basically ask the historian to do some of the work of the critical reader, but the student of history must always make his own comparisons and investigations before deciding how much to trust the historian.
“Why Western History Matters” is an essay adapted from a speech Donald Kagan delivered to the National Association of Scholars, and was reprinted in the December 28, 1994, issue of the Wall Street Journal. Throughout Kagan’s essay, he describes the essential need for the college course, Western History. He does so by examining older cultures and explaining why they were quintessential to the past and to our future development as a society. I strongly concur with Kagan’s standpoint of the necessity of history, and the realization of how exactly our flourishing society came about. History is a key constituent in determining who we are; for to determine who we are one must first know from whence they came. In the words of George Santayana, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”.
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.
The Strange Career of Jim Crow, by C. Van Woodward, traces the history of race relations in the United States from the mid and late nineteenth century through the twentieth century. In doing so Woodward brings to light significant aspects of Reconstruction that remain unknown to many today. He argues that the races were not as separate many people believe until the Jim Crow laws. To set up such an argument, Woodward first outlines the relationship between Southern and Northern whites, and African Americans during the nineteenth century. He then breaks down the details of the injustice brought about by the Jim Crow laws, and outlines the transformation in American society from discrimination to Civil Rights. Woodward’s argument is very persuasive because he uses specific evidence to support his opinions and to connect his ideas. Considering the time period in which the book and its editions were written, it should be praised for its insight into and analysis of the most important social issue in American history.
Gorn, Elliot J., Randy Roberts, and Terry D. Bilhartz. Constructing the American Past: A Source Book of a People’s History. 7th ed. Vol 2. New Jersy: Pearson Education Inc., 2011. Print.
“One is astonished in the study of history at the recurrence of the idea that evil must be forgotten, distorted, skimmed over. The difficulty, of course, with this philosophy is that history loses its value as an incentive and example; it paints perfect men and noble nations, but it does not tell the truth.”
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.
The debate regarding whether or not history could be objective has been discussed and interpreted by many historians. The ways we think about history has allowed for the divergence of various perspectives in the world we live in today. In sum, the question discussed in this paper pertains to the extent of which history can be objective. This question has left room for several interpretations in the field of historiography and challenged our experienced in the era of modernity. This paper’s argument went for the subjective side of the argument with evidence for my argumentation from John Gaddis, Friedrich Nietzsche, Postmodernity and Modernity, Living in Modernity, and Heidegger’s Hermeneutics.
We are introduced to historical work done by North America, Germany, Great Britain, Belgium, Italy, France, Central Europe, and some minor reference to Poland and Russia. The three main divisions of the text are a gamut of information about the late 19th and early 20th century. It is during this time that Iggers talks about Leopold Ranke and the influence of his brilliant ideas. “It was Ranke's aim to turn history into a rigorous science practiced by professionally trained historians” (Iggers, 2005). Ranke initially introduced the ...
Fukuyama, F. (1989). The End of History.The National Interest, Summer. Retrieved February 2, 2014, from http://www.wesjones.com/eoh.htm
Though our history may bring back horrible memories of the ?grimmest dimensions of human nature? (Limerick 472), it is necessary to have a good historical background. History gives us the ability to improve future outputs, satisfy our unending need for knowledge, and understand how many policies and regulations have come to be. Without history mankind would be very primitive and ununified. Our complete molding of the world today is almost completely dependent on the fact that we study our history. Without history present day humans would be nothing more than cavemen.
History is a story told over time. It is a way of recreating the past so it can be studied in the present and re-interpreted for future generations. Since humans are the sole beneficiaries of history, it is important for us to know what the purpose of history is and how historians include their own perspective concerning historical events. The purpose and perspective of history is vital in order for individuals to realise how it would be almost impossible for us to live out our lives effectively if we had no knowledge of the past. Also, in order to gain a sound knowledge of the past, we have to understand the political, social and cultural aspects of the times we are studying.