It interesting to see how the popular lessons of an historical event change with generations... convieniently leaving out what doesn't support the opinions of the day... that is why careful study of many many, even odd sources, is neccesary to even begin to grasp at the reality of it... think of how many layers of propaganda and mythology you have to sift through to even get to the real history... each generation adding its bit of distortion.
For instance, the crusades... there was this whole period not that long ago where they were glorified etc etc... then shunned... etc etc.. What I suggest for that particular period of History is to read the Arab Historians as they openly acknowledge where they are stating opinions v. research and fact, and quite a bit more objective... because Europe was the center of raving primitive fundamentalism at that juncture of History, and Islam was the steward and protector of high civilization, and Byzantium to a degree... China was certainly in its own right a high civilization and never really has lost that aspect... it is truly the high civilization that has the greatest Historical continuity... one could argue the point on that with respect to Mesopotamia, but it saw so many transformations and changes that it really can't be called the same civilization each time...
The interesting thing is what the "modern experts" tell us to learn from these periods shifts with whatever the status quo is or anti-status quo. This isn't always true, but is at least true with pop-History and Mythology.
Anonymity problem and general confuseness.
Moderators: Public Relations Department, Players Department
-
rklenseth
- Posts: 4736
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 12:46 am
Most historical events are distorted from the beginning so it is really hard to find a starting source.
The best way to begin are to look at primary sources. Yes, they are biases but that is why you look at primary sources from all the angles.
But this would be hard to relate to Cantr due to the lack of primary sources.
The best way to begin are to look at primary sources. Yes, they are biases but that is why you look at primary sources from all the angles.
But this would be hard to relate to Cantr due to the lack of primary sources.
-
grayjaket
- Posts: 680
- Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 3:16 am
- Location: Kentucky
-
David
- Posts: 696
- Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 5:50 am
- Location: Maryland/America
There are things that are obvious interpretations... but through Historical triangulation it is possible to ascertain certain facts or be fairly confident of them... for instance exact troop strengths, times and dates, exact statements... one can cite this exception and that exception, as uncertainty is always a factor in life. As far as what is thought of as important or small or big, if those bare facts are brought to bear, it is up to the reader.
One can use the Philosophical argument of the uncertainty of absolute truth, but we haven't decided not to use the produce of science because the exact principles behind everything isn't certain. Therefore, one has to have some confidence in the interpretations of experts, but not without counter-research and a grain of salt. A devil-may-care attitude about it may satiate some, but to say that their is nothing their to examine because everything is subjective is like saying lets throw out science. On practical aspect of History is to study it in comparison to what happens in today's world... certain things seem to happen over and over again, its worth applying that knowledge in policy and academics, as we apply science to the natural world, without complete certainty.
Although this touches on something I was thinking of over the past few months with respect to religion. It was originally a political question I had but it has gone much deeper than that now...
I originally asked myself... why is it, that Southern Presidents are represented far more than those from other regions. Are they more charismatic or trustworthy etc...? That being the layman's response. What I found however, was that the only location in the country of any large size and population that is relatively homogenous in religion and ethics, or at least a majority... is the Southern and deep Southern states... predominantly Baptist and some other similar protestant sects... all with the same basic philisophical grounding in many respects.... every other area of the country, aside from Utah and a few other places... is completely fractured along sectrarian lines... a smattering of Catholics here, some methodists over there, some lutherans up there etc etc....
And then I thought about the Republican Party v. Democratic Party. The Republican party at this point is much like the Vatican is to the Catholic Church... there may be some debate, but eventually most fall in line or are silenced... the Democrats are opposite, they can't get anything going without constant debate and shreading eachother apart, except for at token events where unity is fiegned. This is due to the Religious demography as stated above and whatever has caused that demography in turn... Now some of these Southerners were Democrats obviously, but Southern Democrats...
What happens in sum is that the views of a minority (ie Southern Protestants) tend to become what drives the national political scene and policy. For two reasons, the complete fracture of most other areas, and their almost complete unity.
.... And this brings me to another point which can be traced back to religion or at least interrelated to it.... Americans are often accused of thinking _everything_ is new under the sun, especially if it happens to them, as it somehow being different then the last 10,000 years of human history where the same dynamics take place over and over again. Esentially a devil-may-care attitude about History or the lessons that can be learned from it... in fact many Europeans know more about American History than Americans do, _very_ basic quizes about History are often flunked by the average American in many cases... I trace this back to religion... as it relates to the American experience. Protestantism has an instinct to sweep History under the rug... Why? Because much of its dogma and doctrine was developed by the Catholic church, antathema to the general thrust of the protestant. So History must be distorted or downplayed... History also meant in America... Old Europe, and no, America is somehow different in the minds of many Americans, before it was for a real reason of Aristocracy v. Meritocracy, but now it is just ideological leftovers that continues to be inculcated in the youth as a sort of reflex in school and in the movies.... Essentially it goes that "we can't learn our way out of a problem, we must invent our way out" Manifest Destiny is related but different...
It has actually been noted that America has by far the highest religiousity as compared with other countries when dealing with basically everything, but especially politics... This wasn't just some survey about how many times people go to church... it asked people their justification for their views on various issues, and the reasons behind them... Americans gave religous justifications and reasons far more than those of other industrialized nations... Many in Europe and other places were religious, but they distinguished government policy as being completely secular in nature v. personal beliefs....
This Southern WASP ethos can be transmitted to anyone of most faiths and backgrounds... since it is the most unified and dominant view... as people do not see the religious underpinnings of dominant views, they just look at the views themselves...
I may have presented this a bit messily and haphazardly... but this basically points to religious underpinnings to many of America, and therefore the world's conflicts and problem... The Historian v. The Inventor....
The irony is that these religious ideologies become completely abstracted, making anyone able to adapt to them, even if it goes against their religion, or native ethos...
I am convinced that you can thread religion through a great many things that on the face of it seem to have nothing to do with religion at all, I am still investigating. Fundamentalism is alive and well in many areas that people think are secular...
What is interesting especially is how relgion and demographics relate to policy and culture... There is a a unified numeric minority, that dominates popular thought, which does not represent the majority of the country, because of the fractured nature of it... and is hardly recognizable on the surface... and this most certainly isn't a conspiracy, it is a demographic fluke of sorts, which essentially margininilizes the majority of minorities... of all sorts... including many white communities... very very interesting, and telling... we aren't so much a 50/50 nation as is the popular saying now... meaning that people are relatively split down the middle... we are a 35/10/15/10/5/10/10/5 nation... which is even diced up more since many of the districts are sliced along various philosophies, further increasing the influence of the Southern WASP bloc. I see no way around it really... except that Catholicism is pushing on the south from the North (Maryland/parts of Virginia) from the west (Texas) and from the south (Florida/Lousiana) Hopefully fracturing the southern bloc, making the entire country fractured again... lol but still with no Historical memory... heh.
One can use the Philosophical argument of the uncertainty of absolute truth, but we haven't decided not to use the produce of science because the exact principles behind everything isn't certain. Therefore, one has to have some confidence in the interpretations of experts, but not without counter-research and a grain of salt. A devil-may-care attitude about it may satiate some, but to say that their is nothing their to examine because everything is subjective is like saying lets throw out science. On practical aspect of History is to study it in comparison to what happens in today's world... certain things seem to happen over and over again, its worth applying that knowledge in policy and academics, as we apply science to the natural world, without complete certainty.
Although this touches on something I was thinking of over the past few months with respect to religion. It was originally a political question I had but it has gone much deeper than that now...
I originally asked myself... why is it, that Southern Presidents are represented far more than those from other regions. Are they more charismatic or trustworthy etc...? That being the layman's response. What I found however, was that the only location in the country of any large size and population that is relatively homogenous in religion and ethics, or at least a majority... is the Southern and deep Southern states... predominantly Baptist and some other similar protestant sects... all with the same basic philisophical grounding in many respects.... every other area of the country, aside from Utah and a few other places... is completely fractured along sectrarian lines... a smattering of Catholics here, some methodists over there, some lutherans up there etc etc....
And then I thought about the Republican Party v. Democratic Party. The Republican party at this point is much like the Vatican is to the Catholic Church... there may be some debate, but eventually most fall in line or are silenced... the Democrats are opposite, they can't get anything going without constant debate and shreading eachother apart, except for at token events where unity is fiegned. This is due to the Religious demography as stated above and whatever has caused that demography in turn... Now some of these Southerners were Democrats obviously, but Southern Democrats...
What happens in sum is that the views of a minority (ie Southern Protestants) tend to become what drives the national political scene and policy. For two reasons, the complete fracture of most other areas, and their almost complete unity.
.... And this brings me to another point which can be traced back to religion or at least interrelated to it.... Americans are often accused of thinking _everything_ is new under the sun, especially if it happens to them, as it somehow being different then the last 10,000 years of human history where the same dynamics take place over and over again. Esentially a devil-may-care attitude about History or the lessons that can be learned from it... in fact many Europeans know more about American History than Americans do, _very_ basic quizes about History are often flunked by the average American in many cases... I trace this back to religion... as it relates to the American experience. Protestantism has an instinct to sweep History under the rug... Why? Because much of its dogma and doctrine was developed by the Catholic church, antathema to the general thrust of the protestant. So History must be distorted or downplayed... History also meant in America... Old Europe, and no, America is somehow different in the minds of many Americans, before it was for a real reason of Aristocracy v. Meritocracy, but now it is just ideological leftovers that continues to be inculcated in the youth as a sort of reflex in school and in the movies.... Essentially it goes that "we can't learn our way out of a problem, we must invent our way out" Manifest Destiny is related but different...
It has actually been noted that America has by far the highest religiousity as compared with other countries when dealing with basically everything, but especially politics... This wasn't just some survey about how many times people go to church... it asked people their justification for their views on various issues, and the reasons behind them... Americans gave religous justifications and reasons far more than those of other industrialized nations... Many in Europe and other places were religious, but they distinguished government policy as being completely secular in nature v. personal beliefs....
This Southern WASP ethos can be transmitted to anyone of most faiths and backgrounds... since it is the most unified and dominant view... as people do not see the religious underpinnings of dominant views, they just look at the views themselves...
I may have presented this a bit messily and haphazardly... but this basically points to religious underpinnings to many of America, and therefore the world's conflicts and problem... The Historian v. The Inventor....
The irony is that these religious ideologies become completely abstracted, making anyone able to adapt to them, even if it goes against their religion, or native ethos...
I am convinced that you can thread religion through a great many things that on the face of it seem to have nothing to do with religion at all, I am still investigating. Fundamentalism is alive and well in many areas that people think are secular...
What is interesting especially is how relgion and demographics relate to policy and culture... There is a a unified numeric minority, that dominates popular thought, which does not represent the majority of the country, because of the fractured nature of it... and is hardly recognizable on the surface... and this most certainly isn't a conspiracy, it is a demographic fluke of sorts, which essentially margininilizes the majority of minorities... of all sorts... including many white communities... very very interesting, and telling... we aren't so much a 50/50 nation as is the popular saying now... meaning that people are relatively split down the middle... we are a 35/10/15/10/5/10/10/5 nation... which is even diced up more since many of the districts are sliced along various philosophies, further increasing the influence of the Southern WASP bloc. I see no way around it really... except that Catholicism is pushing on the south from the North (Maryland/parts of Virginia) from the west (Texas) and from the south (Florida/Lousiana) Hopefully fracturing the southern bloc, making the entire country fractured again... lol but still with no Historical memory... heh.
Last edited by David on Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
rklenseth
- Posts: 4736
- Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 12:46 am
oooooh, I can point out why presidents tend to be from the south. If you combine all of the southern states together then they make up the majority in the electorial college. And it is very unseldom for a southern state to vote for someone else that is from a different part of the region. Yes, it is true that the bigger electorial states are in other regions but the south is usually quite united and have a combined electorial vote greater than any other region. And they usually vote for candidates from their region.
Last edited by rklenseth on Tue Feb 17, 2004 4:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
David
- Posts: 696
- Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 5:50 am
- Location: Maryland/America
-
The Industriallist
- Posts: 1862
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 7:25 pm
Primary sources are somewhat rare, but there seem to be more of them all the time. People are writing their own histories, and leaving notes everywhere. I have found primary sources refering to governments no one remembers. But without context, it becomes hard to understand these things, and they end up in garbage envelopes in no particular order, with no datestamps. Very difficult.
Really, is it so hard to date everything?
Really, is it so hard to date everything?
"If I can be a good crackhead, I can be a good Christian"
-A subway preacher
-A subway preacher
-
west
- Posts: 4649
- Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Return to “General Discussion”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest