QUOTE: Nancy Partner describes history as "the definitive human audacity imposed on formless time and meaningless event"
QUESTION: Would you agree that history is meaningless? Or do you see it as a learning advantage and something that we can help out future with?
Hey there Adale! I would not agree with the statement that history is "meaningless," per say, but I would definitely argue that it has an element of relativity to it. As stated in Glenn's article, history is usually someone's interpretation of an event that was written or otherwise preserved for future generations, and of course, interpretations are biased. History is not absolute, as nothing can really ever communicate exactly what happened in history. I think that history is important to reference when making decisions that will effect the people or a nation, but history is not absolute. Hope this helps!
ReplyDeleteUnlike Nancy Partner, I believe history is very meaningful. I know things change with time, but we also have to learn where things came from; why we live the way we do and why we are where we are. We can improve our future by learning about history, mistakes from the past, or we can take ideas from it.
ReplyDeletei would not say history is meaningless, it is in fact extremely important as history constantly repeats itself. Yet, we should not base future ideas and goals solely off history, as technology keeps expanding and the possibility to do more things increases. Yet to say history is meaningless is simply untrue in my opinion
ReplyDeleteI do think that history is important to study and can help for improving the future. What is bothersome is when people can't separate history from the present. When we can't separate history from the present we get stuck in our ways. This just wastes time that could be dedicated toward improving the future.
ReplyDelete