Beauty of History and Literature

 

The year after I left university, while working as a supervisor for a local bar and nightclub, I applied to a graduate fast-track scheme for a large recruitment consultancy. The scheme offered good money, benefits and prospects. The process was competitive. I had to go through two local interviews and a regional one. Suited and […]

via History: the Ghost at the Feast — bennewmark

History helps humans learn from their past mistakes and hopefully avoid them in the future. It also forms a common sense of heritage. So, historians play a pivotal role in the world as they study and interpret the past. To do this, they use reason, imagination, and language, WOKS that are essential for scientists and authors as well.

Historians have access to a wide range of sources. Often, they have to pick the best data, use deductive or inductive reasoning, and compile all this information into a sequential story. To do this, they follow a process that is quite similar to the scientific method. As in the sciences, historians observe and analyze primary sources. While this practice is sensitive to a historian’s sense perception, it is regimented in that historians are taught to analyze an artifact using a set of guided questions that help them develop their analysis and remain unbiased. All historians have to follow this practice, adding a sense of objectivity to the method of deconstructing the sources. Moreover, while in the sciences, experiments are conducted in order to test the validity of the hypotheses, historians use models, simulations, and secondary data to verify their conjectures. For instance, Richard Rissetto created detailed computer simulations of the ancient Mayan site of Copán in Honduras to better establish his hypothesis.[1] Making a simulation helped him see if his hypothesis was valid, but it also helped his research be more objective as other historians could evaluate and verify his theories through the simulation. Finally, historians compile all their data into one plausible hypothesis. They do this by employing logical reasoning, a fundamental WOK of the natural sciences as well. The process by which historians synthesize evidence demonstrates that the acquirement of knowledge in history and natural sciences are quite similar, suggesting that a historian’s work aligns with that of a scientist’s.

Historians have access to a wide range of sources. Often, they have to pick the best data, use deductive or inductive reasoning, and compile all this information into a sequential story. To do this, they follow a process that is quite similar to the scientific method. As in the sciences, historians observe and analyze primary sources. While this practice is sensitive to a historian’s sense perception, it is regimented in that historians are taught to analyze an artifact using a set of guided questions that help them develop their analysis and remain unbiased. All historians have to follow this practice, adding a sense of objectivity to the method of deconstructing the sources. Moreover, while in the sciences, experiments are conducted in order to test the validity of the hypotheses, historians use models, simulations, and secondary data to verify their conjectures. For instance, Richard Rissetto created detailed computer simulations of the ancient Mayan site of Copán in Honduras to better establish his hypothesis.[1] Making a simulation helped him see if his hypothesis was valid, but it also helped his research be more objective as other historians could evaluate and verify his theories through the simulation. Finally, historians compile all their data into one plausible hypothesis. They do this by employing logical reasoning, a fundamental WOK of the natural sciences as well. The process by which historians synthesize evidence demonstrates that the acquirement of knowledge in history and natural sciences are quite similar, suggesting that a historian’s work aligns with that of a scientist’s.

Scientists try to remain objective by using a language – mathematics – that is logical, precise and timeless. However, historians use languages that are ambiguous and their social and historical environments impact the way they recount the past. This affects the objectivity and accuracy of their research.

It is important to evaluate the way in which history is synthesized in order to understand its significance. Although the scientific method is used to analyze resources and come to a general consensus, historians attempt to find casual relationships to make the narrative flow like a story so that it is more relevant and meaningful for viewers. Thus, historians take on the role of writers and scientists.

Bibliography:
https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/these-technologies-are-giving-new-life-ancient-world-ncna792921

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Beauty of History and Literature

  1. As much as I am interested in the future, history is very important to me. It is so because it is very important that I learn from the mistakes of the past. I can only wish that more people would be so sensitive and logical.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s