|
|
Re: History
Kari Forbes-Boyte (KFORBESBOYT@CSC1.CSC.EDU)
Mon, 28 Aug 1995 10:31:47 -0600
On Mon, 28 Aug 1995, Nick Corduan wrote:
> The answer, IMHO, is no. History is not "had." History is not in
> *anybody's* hands -- or at least it shouldn't be. History is absolute -- it
> is not subjective or relative. What happened happened, period. History
> should not be in the hands of the victors *or* the losers. History is
> history is history. Facts are facts. Truth is truth.
> This is not to say that some peole do not, nor that some groups are not more
> likely to, distort the facts and truths of history. They do and they are.
Nick,
While history is history, facts are facts, and truth is truth,
how they are intrepreted varies widely. Why? Because of different
perspectives, purposes, etc. If you stood in a corner peering into a
mirror that gave you a partial view of a fight, would you recount the
same story as a participant in the fight. Of course not! Your
perspective would be much different.
Likewise, if your buddy had started the fight and had been defeated,
you might try to place the blame on the other participant. The truth, as
told by you, would be skewed by your purpose; protecting your friend.
This is the truth as you would see it. We are all affected in the
telling of history by many variables, therefore I have a hard time with
historians who try to pass themselves off as scientists, albeit soft
scientists.
My two cents!
Steve Boyte
|