The beginning of the unit already managed
to bring those observing into the world of it, starting off with a simulation
of what it was like when the Europeans colonized the Americas. Of course, this
achieved in showing us how history is, ultimately, a story, which can be told
from multiple different perspectives. Charles Becker asks three questions.
"What is Historical fact?" "Where is Historical Fact?" and
"When is Historical fact?" The answer to each sum up to basically explain
that History is in the eye of the beholder. Historical facts are in the head of
the person thinking about it, as Historical fact is not the same thing as
Historical event. All of these thoughts are present, therefore are only located
within the present. A good example to explain this is the example of a map of
Egypt. The map of Egypt is not actually Egypt, but rather a representation of
Egypt, the same way how Historical fact isn't the actual event but a
representation of the event.
Another factor to the idea of historical
fact is that something cannot really be considered a fact until it is approved
by multiple different sources. Due to this, a fact isn't necessarily what has
occurred, but the acceptance that something has occurred. An example of this
was when we did the colonization simulation in class, and my beta character
went over to be diplomatic with the other tribe. Though my character claimed in
his book that he was trying to be diplomatic, the fact that all others claimed I
had betrayed them overruled the actual fact. In a sense, emotion plays a
large part in history, as what people write down in primary sources might be
the result of their own perception of things rather than an unbiased claim on
what it is that actually occurs. In that case, saying that history is absolute
is not a very adequate claim, as history happened in many different ways inside
the heads of people.
Though historical
fact might only be a representation of what actually occurred, there are actual
scars left due to the events that serve as fact as well. The existence of Auschwitz
is a clear reminder of the horrors of the Holocaust, being something actually
tangible rather than actually a thought. Though they are simply shadows of a
different time, there is no doubt that those things actually did occur.
Good, Manny. You write in a concise and measured way, which I really appreciate. I like everything you've done here. It's a really good overall outline of a tight ToK response. The next step is to layer more on top of this. For example, you could do a quick comment about map/story knowledge when you mention story, or you could further justify and explore the idea of story (like what is a story? Why would humans tell history that way? What are the strengths and limitations?) See what I mean? You've got enough understanding and are a good enough writer that you can set slightly harder tasks for yourself, throw more balls in the air to juggle.
ReplyDelete