Thank you so much for all of your feedback on Big Think's new beta site -- there are big changes in store that you'll see beginning early in the new year.
HISTORY
How do we know who's history is right?
  • Currently 0.5
  • 0
  • 1
  • 2

(2)
All Work and Low Pay
Uploaded on 01/18/2008

History is written by the victor, and it seems that history is also easily maliable. We know that Columbus didn't really find America first, and that the pilgrims probably didn't really have that many peaceful thanksgiving dinners with the Native Americans. Just with the descrepencies of the last 50 years in modern history, how do we honestly know what things in history are factual, which are twists and exaturations, or what are even just flat out lies?

 

3
2
2
Responses
SORT BY
Re: How do we know who's history is right?

Each of us, in fact, writes his own history, by cherry-picking those bits of pre-existing history cherry-picked and filtered by others, that support our world view.

From extensive study of the JFK assassination (my work is available at patspeer.com) I came to see how people investigating the case, from day one, saw Oswald either as a "patsy"--an ordinary guy put in extraordinary circumstances--or as a psychopathic loser out to make a name for himself.  It's clear that those in the upper echelons of society-people who think of themselves as self-made or as "deserving" of their success, resent that a man as poor as Oswald, a Marxist, would have people believe in his innocence.  To their minds, Oswald's motive is obvious: he hated himself and his failed life and thought his only chance at making a name for himself was by killing the President.

To others, including myself, this is ludicrous. Of course, Oswald MAY have wanted to kiil Kennedy for personal reasons, but nothing in his behavior indicated as much. He certainly never bragged about killing Kennedy. He even told the cops that killing Kennedy was stupid because Johnson would be no better.  

Another factor determining one's view of the assassination is one's respect for expertise and authority. Those holding that Oswald did it most always defer to "experts" of one sort or an other, and attack the expertise of the nay-sayers.  If you challenge the experts on some of their conclusions, and even prove these experts incompetent or deceptive (as I myself have done in the videos at patspeer.com) they will not respond to you with facts, but attack your right to question the authority and initegirty of the experts.  They will do this even when you show something as simple and obvious as that a doctor testified with his exhibit upside down.

Bottom line: official history is the cumulative guesswork of those with a platform to broadcast their guesses.

Perspectives on history change not because people change their minds so much as that those of one perspective die off and are replaced by people exposed to different platforms.

 

0
0
Re: How do we know who's history is right?
I agree history is written by the victor,not in the sense he can change the collective conscious which is represented by the mythology and folklore but because,more fundamentally,he designs the history books which form part of the school curriculum.This is because as it happened in India a formal study of history started happening only when the British introduced the Western education in India with all the distortions inherent in it. It therefore follows that not all history studied in history books is right .For a correct perception of the historical events one must sift the truth by a proper balance between written history and other indigenous sources like parchments , other unorganised evidences like stone and copper inscriptions,literature ,folklore etc.
0
0
PAGE
1