How much of history is real? - This ain't a rhetorical quest

[Behind enemy lines]

How much has capitalism/mean people re-writen history???

Makes you wonder aye.

[redstar2000]

Bel, history gets rewritten constantly; partly because of new evidence, partly because existing evidence can be interpreted in a new way, etc.

How much of it is "true" in some ultimate sense? Who knows? All we can do is figure out things as best we can, what seems to be the most logical explanation, what seems to conform best to the evidence available, etc.

The alternative--advocated by the post-modernists and by some mystics--is that history and everything else is UNKNOWABLE. I find that to be rather watery beer myself, but some folks do develop a taste for it.

[redstar2000]

True, Juanita, every historian brings their personal assumptions and even prejudices with them when they sit down to write.

But there are many historians and not all of them side with the "winners".

Reading history, or any serious work, requires that you bring your own critical sense with you when you sit down to read. Does the evidence appear convincing? Does the author clearly state his/her assumptions? Is the account plausible...does it resemble the way things happen from your own personal observations?

We will never have "perfect knowledge" of anything...but we can still do pretty good if we make the effort.

[queen of diamonds]

It's all real in the person's mind, but only one account is real - and that's the true one. In all likelihood, no-one's actually given in, nor is anyone going to.
How much of history is real? You can never truly be sure. But historians today are more able to speak their minds about an issue than most before them. Sure, they may get ignored, their ideas may be attacked and refuted, but at least the information is there to be accessed.

[Behind enemy lines]

I do realise that there is no answer to my question. Just put it up to make a point.

IF YOU CAN'T PROVE HISTORY, DON'T GET SO WORKED UP ABOUT IT. YOU COULD BE WRONG.

Once again this is just my opinion.

[queen of diamonds]

Quote: from Behind enemy lines on 11:34 pm on Feb. 8, 2003
I do realise that there is no answer to my question. Just put it up to make a point.

IF YOU CAN'T PROVE HISTORY, DON'T GET SO WORKED UP ABOUT IT. YOU COULD BE WRONG.

Once again this is just my opinion.

I couldn't have put it better myself. Unfortunately, it's far too easy to come across people who don't seem to need evidence to have history proved to them any more.

I think the first rule in history must be: QUESTION EVERYTHING!

[Behind enemy lines]

Very good comrades

Nice to meet friendly open minded people such as you.

[Kashmir]

How much of anything is true my friends?

[Behind enemy lines]

That's right. What is truth? Is my truth the same as yours, after all, we all percieve things in different ways.

[eyesclosed]

asking how much of history is real is like asking how much of religion is real...........

[redstar2000]

Well, folks, let's not get carried away. Because the truth of history is not "certain" and sometimes is very difficult to ascertain, that doesn't mean that history is "a matter of opinion."

That Germany invaded Poland in September of 1939 is TRUE. That Poland invaded Germany in September of 1939 is FALSE. Opinions are NOT relevant.

Of course, the more complex the historical phenomenon under discussion, the more difficult it can be to make statements that are clearly true. More evidence is required, a larger imagination is required, etc.

Still, if you throw your hands up and say "it's all opinion" then you've simply abandoned any meaningful concept of history altogether.

And, I must admit, some people PREFER that option; they find more comfort in folk tales, superstitions (religion), racial or ethnic stereotypes, etc. Once you abandon the effort to rationally understand the world, you've only the old reactionary habits of the human species to fall back on. And FALL is exactly the right word.



(Edited by redstar2000 at 4:02 am on Jan. 13, 2003)

[Behind enemy lines]

Are you refering to me comrade?

[CubaVictoria1983]

I agree to the statement made about everyone having their own truths...and yeah, my truth is probably not the same as yours.....and if I decide that Poland did invade Germany in 1939, that will be my truth, regardless of what anyone wants to say or try to prove me wrong...which isn't what I believe, but I just wanted to use as example That is when you are reaching freedom....


(Edited by CubaVictoria1983 at 11:42 pm on Jan. 12, 2003)

[redstar2000]

"If I decide that Poland did invade Germany in 1939, that will be my truth regardless of what anyone wants to say or try to prove me wrong..."--CubaVictoria1983

And if you decide that "the Jews are our misfortune"...will that ALSO be YOUR "truth"?

And if you decide that black people are "natural" slaves, will that ALSO be YOUR "truth"?

And if you decide that America is "God's choice to rule the world", will that ALSO be YOUR "truth"?

See where you end up? You can say literally ANYTHING and no one can dispute it, by the rules of your "argument".

That's the problem with ultra-subjectivism. When consistently applied, it's the equivalent of a self-inflicted prefrontal lobotomy.

[ComradeJunichi]

I believe that more than the question of "How much history is true", the question is how history is presented. I mean this on the intellectual level. So, the facts are true...however, how are they pieced together and presented?

[Behind enemy lines]

In response to Comrade Joon....

For example, and a poor one at that, Say back in ye old days there was a man in a village who had heard there was a war going on with huge armies. The next day 100 men on horses ride into his village and fuck it up, leaving only him alive(cos he hide in pig shit). He goes onto write that a massive invasion happened in his village. To him, a old man who has never seen war, 100 men on horses weilding swords seems like a lot of people.
Later on a historian gathers his info and see's his discription of the army and by his standards it seems like thousands of men invaded. And so on.
Therefore his facts are untrue.

I only just woke up so I'm not not sure if I understood joons comment fully so tell me if I'm just writing shit again