Calling all historians!
RemadE
Global Moderator
Tomorrow I have what is called a "Day Paper" assignment and I thought "why not share it?" so I was wondering if it could turn into a group discussion so i could use a broad range of opinions, as it will beat quoting just academic Professors etc. Y'know?
Anyway, this isn't a "do my work for me" thread. Just a paragraph or so, and I'll incorporate it
It starts at 09:15 tomorrow, then I return to my room to do it over 24 hours.
Anyway, this isn't a "do my work for me" thread. Just a paragraph or so, and I'll incorporate it
It starts at 09:15 tomorrow, then I return to my room to do it over 24 hours.
Comments
How, by any stretch of anybody's imagination, could you be considered a historian?
Because that made a lot of sense:rolleyes:
This.
"In assessing the validity of a Historian's account, it is always necessary to ascertain who s/he was/is and her/his audience." Discuss.
Shame all the books are now taken from the library and everyone on my course has turned into a cunt.
Not a full paper, but mentioning that editing history in such a way as to not include events that have undergone later scrutiny, and especially in cases when the judgement of those in charge has been found to be flawed, in the interests of keeping that information from students until they reach an age when they can place it in a larger historical context, would be a good tangent, worthy of a paragraph or so.
(just don't use any run on sentences like that one!)
As for relating these omissions to the general validity of a text, you could take the stance that by deliberate omission, a complete view of the historical period was denied the reader, therefore the context of all the other information in the text was skewed by the omission, usually towards the bias of the author. You can cherrypick historical facts from any period and arrive at a conclusion that would be acceptable to a publisher with a bias. In the case of textbooks it is a bias towards creating an environment for a student to learn about his/her nations history without having to deal with the bits they will later find repulsive as adults.
C/O
"wish I had gone to college, mostly for the parties"
After that comes another era of history and so forth. Basically I'll go through history until I get to a modern part, then comes the girl and drugs I ordered for later tonight. After that comes postmodernism, as I have no fucking clue what that is.
In short -
Going through history, talking about prominent historians from the time and looking at why they left out or were biased in certain aspects of history. I then get to my era and things become more personal.
Just spitballing now. 22 hours left.
Sweet. I have a few grams of Cubes here. Tempting to chomp on them later and get creative.
Although I have not studied the examination of historical evidence for some years, I would start of looking at it from PuRe BiN - Purpose of historical view, Relationship of the historian to the evidence discussed and to the viewpoint / conclusion, if their would be any reason for the historian to be Bias and the Nature of the account that has been given - for example is it a photo, written evidence, an artifact, a video etcetera.
Two for the above statement and on against for each of the points, a source to back up each one and there is a 1st for you.