The War
Headlines
Movies
Screenshots
Alliance Community
2011: We're Back!

Alliance: The Silent War

Community Forums for Alliance: The Silent War
It is currently Thu Dec 09, 2021 7:29 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 12:54 pm 
Offline
Private First Class

Joined: Mon May 29, 2006 1:12 pm
Posts: 25
Location: the Netherlands, Ede GLD
keep one thing in mind, history is writhen by the counties that think they won a war, all history has a "color". as I've sad history isn't objective.

_________________
sorry for my crappy English


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 4:41 pm 
Offline
Corporal

Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 7:44 am
Posts: 64
Location: Tennessee
Fuijn wrote:
keep one thing in mind, history is writhen by the counties that think they won a war, all history has a "color". as I've sad history isn't objective.


History is written by people many years after the event. It is written by objective historians.

_________________
Nothing capable of being memorized is history. - RG Collingwood


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:08 pm 
Offline
2nd Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 2:54 pm
Posts: 592
the victorys right the history books thats why you don't hear about all the bad things the guys who won the war did to win it :roll:

_________________
Image
Image
Image
Sox's assistant and the number one grunt of the NZG
don't mess with a nation that needs medication


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2006 8:27 am 
Offline
Private

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 11:36 pm
Posts: 11
Muhler wrote:
Fuijn wrote:
keep one thing in mind, history is writhen by the counties that think they won a war, all history has a "color". as I've sad history isn't objective.


History is written by people many years after the event. It is written by objective historians.



No offense but that is very naïve to say. There is no such a thing as objective opinion. Every opinion is influenced by something and it is not always the truth. It is same with history.
Winners and powerful write/recreate history to their likes. Always was – always will be.


SW


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 09, 2006 12:57 pm 
Offline
Corporal

Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 7:44 am
Posts: 64
Location: Tennessee
Steppenwolf wrote:
Muhler wrote:
Fuijn wrote:
keep one thing in mind, history is writhen by the counties that think they won a war, all history has a "color". as I've sad history isn't objective.


History is written by people many years after the event. It is written by objective historians.



No offense but that is very naïve to say. There is no such a thing as objective opinion. Every opinion is influenced by something and it is not always the truth. It is same with history.
Winners and powerful write/recreate history to their likes. Always was – always will be.


SW


I disagree, but thats for another thread. :)

_________________
Nothing capable of being memorized is history. - RG Collingwood


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 9:12 am 
Offline
Private

Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 11:36 pm
Posts: 11
Muhler wrote:
Steppenwolf wrote:
Muhler wrote:
Fuijn wrote:
keep one thing in mind, history is writhen by the counties that think they won a war, all history has a "color". as I've sad history isn't objective.


History is written by people many years after the event. It is written by objective historians.



No offense but that is very naïve to say. There is no such a thing as objective opinion. Every opinion is influenced by something and it is not always the truth. It is same with history.
Winners and powerful write/recreate history to their likes. Always was – always will be.


SW


I disagree, but thats for another thread. :)



:D I respect your opinion but also I am basing mine on first hand real life experience. Truth always comes in different form/flavor depending on what side one can hear it from… Power and media control was never more important than it is case in nowadays. In addition, "media freedom" is very good joke. Sadly, most people tend to believe in "media freedom" but as you said; that is perhaps something for another thread, time and place.

All the best,


SW


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:46 pm 
Offline
Corporal

Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 7:44 am
Posts: 64
Location: Tennessee
Steppenwolf wrote:
Muhler wrote:
Steppenwolf wrote:
Muhler wrote:
Fuijn wrote:
keep one thing in mind, history is writhen by the counties that think they won a war, all history has a "color". as I've sad history isn't objective.


History is written by people many years after the event. It is written by objective historians.



No offense but that is very naïve to say. There is no such a thing as objective opinion. Every opinion is influenced by something and it is not always the truth. It is same with history.
Winners and powerful write/recreate history to their likes. Always was – always will be.


SW


I disagree, but thats for another thread. :)



:D I respect your opinion but also I am basing mine on first hand real life experience. Truth always comes in different form/flavor depending on what side one can hear it from… Power and media control was never more important than it is case in nowadays. In addition, "media freedom" is very good joke. Sadly, most people tend to believe in "media freedom" but as you said; that is perhaps something for another thread, time and place.

All the best,


SW


While thats true it is the job of the historian to take things from as many points of view as possible and get as close to the truth as he or she can. This relies on much more than the media. The only thing the media is (or atleast should be) used for is to gauge what people back then thought, or were exposed to. For the more serious studies private papers and official documents play a much greater role.

Maybe I should create a thread in the messhall eh?

_________________
Nothing capable of being memorized is history. - RG Collingwood


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:23 pm 
Offline
Four Star General
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 12, 2006 5:05 pm
Posts: 1071
Location: New York, NY
Split it from the Communist Revolutions thread. It relates directly to our interpretation of history, so unless it turns into a flame war it probably best fits in this forum.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:39 pm 
Offline
Corporal

Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 7:44 am
Posts: 64
Location: Tennessee
Sox34 wrote:
Split it from the Communist Revolutions thread. It relates directly to our interpretation of history, so unless it turns into a flame war it probably best fits in this forum.


Thank you Sox. Its been a good debate thus far and I wouldnt expect flames.

_________________
Nothing capable of being memorized is history. - RG Collingwood


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:41 am 
Offline
Corporal

Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 5:50 am
Posts: 78
Muhler wrote:

While thats true it is the job of the historian to take things from as many points of view as possible and get as close to the truth as he or she can. This relies on much more than the media. The only thing the media is (or atleast should be) used for is to gauge what people back then thought, or were exposed to. For the more serious studies private papers and official documents play a much greater role.

Maybe I should create a thread in the messhall eh?


The job of the historian is whatever the person paying him says it is. Tacitus is a great example of a classical historian with a bias.

There is also a large difference between academic history and domestic history. Most of our concepts of recent history for example are gleaned from entertainment shows.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 11:54 am 
Offline
Corporal

Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 7:44 am
Posts: 64
Location: Tennessee
baff wrote:
The job of the historian is whatever the person paying him says it is. Tacitus is a great example of a classical historian with a bias.

There is also a large difference between academic history and domestic history. Most of our concepts of recent history for example are gleaned from entertainment shows.


That is the job of a bad historian working for someone and writing biased tripe. Good historians usualy work for themselves or a Uni and write books.

It is true that there is a large gap between adacemic history and what I call "pop" history. Too many people get their history from the History channel or movies.

_________________
Nothing capable of being memorized is history. - RG Collingwood


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 12:29 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:07 am
Posts: 376
Location: Sweden
Well, there is no freedom of make history to apare in different and clearer views for humankind... Freelance historians have been jailed for written down in their own history books or more even sience books... That the holycoust never happend in Hitlers Germany and this all is just a tactical play from jews and MEDIA...

If you say that the jews have a deeper meaning to been killed by Germans in 1942... And it have all beeing a media play for your eyes...

You can be jailed for it... Is that freedom of explore the real history...

ANSWER = NO...

Can you read about it ?

ANSWER = EVEN MORE NO... THEN YOU A NUTCASE...

Can this historians have right about what they say ?

ANSWER = NO... MEDIA HAS THE RIGHT TO SAY WHATS RIGHT TO SAY...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 2:09 pm 
Offline
Corporal

Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 7:44 am
Posts: 64
Location: Tennessee
IceBallz wrote:
Well, there is no freedom of make history to apare in different and clearer views for humankind... Freelance historians have been jailed for written down in their own history books or more even sience books... That the holycoust never happend in Hitlers Germany and this all is just a tactical play from jews and MEDIA...

If you say that the jews have a deeper meaning to been killed by Germans in 1942... And it have all beeing a media play for your eyes...

You can be jailed for it... Is that freedom of explore the real history...

ANSWER = NO...

Can you read about it ?

ANSWER = EVEN MORE NO... THEN YOU A NUTCASE...

Can this historians have right about what they say ?

ANSWER = NO... MEDIA HAS THE RIGHT TO SAY WHATS RIGHT TO SAY...


Im not sure what you're saying here. It is true that in some areas people are limited as to what can or cannot be said. That is not the case here in the US fortunatly. Those that deny the Holocaust should be allowed to say what they want so that we can debunk them.

I can't make out what you mean by the second part at all.

_________________
Nothing capable of being memorized is history. - RG Collingwood


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2006 2:16 pm 
Offline
Sergeant Major

Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 3:07 am
Posts: 376
Location: Sweden
Muhler wrote:
IceBallz wrote:
Well, there is no freedom of make history to apare in different and clearer views for humankind... Freelance historians have been jailed for written down in their own history books or more even sience books... That the holycoust never happend in Hitlers Germany and this all is just a tactical play from jews and MEDIA...

If you say that the jews have a deeper meaning to been killed by Germans in 1942... And it have all beeing a media play for your eyes...

You can be jailed for it... Is that freedom of explore the real history...

ANSWER = NO...

Can you read about it ?

ANSWER = EVEN MORE NO... THEN YOU A NUTCASE...

Can this historians have right about what they say ?

ANSWER = NO... MEDIA HAS THE RIGHT TO SAY WHATS RIGHT TO SAY...


Im not sure what you're saying here. It is true that in some areas people are limited as to what can or cannot be said. That is not the case here in the US fortunatly. Those that deny the Holocaust should be allowed to say what they want so that we can debunk them.

I can't make out what you mean by the second part at all.


Well i mean that the history is best... When you can read it betwin the lines...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:18 pm 
Offline
Private

Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:25 pm
Posts: 6
Speaking as a student currently working towards a Ph.D in history, I feel I can safely say that objectivism in any historical work is something of a myth, but that this has little to do with the intent of the author. One can go on and on about how you can't trust historians because "history is written by the victor" or that some historians push a particular thesis because of external pressure, but the truth is that even if you were to disregard all external pressures that might operate upon the historian (such as political, social, or economic pressure), it would be impossible to create an impartial history since the primary-source documents from a given time period are limited and may reflect biases themselves, and moreover any presentation of ideas constitutes an argument in some form or another as the historian's own conception and interpretation of external stimuli (primary sources or otherwise) is going to be unique, regardless of his own intentions of objectivity. The best you can do is to create a free market place of ideas in which all of these individual interpretations can be presented and argued so that individuals can come to their own consensus, which can itself be subject to criticism and improvement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:20 am 
Offline
2nd Lieutenant
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 2:54 pm
Posts: 592
talhoffer1 wrote:
Speaking as a student currently working towards a Ph.D in history, I feel I can safely say that objectivism in any historical work is something of a myth, but that this has little to do with the intent of the author. One can go on and on about how you can't trust historians because "history is written by the victor" or that some historians push a particular thesis because of external pressure, but the truth is that even if you were to disregard all external pressures that might operate upon the historian (such as political, social, or economic pressure), it would be impossible to create an impartial history since the primary-source documents from a given time period are limited and may reflect biases themselves, and moreover any presentation of ideas constitutes an argument in some form or another as the historian's own conception and interpretation of external stimuli (primary sources or otherwise) is going to be unique, regardless of his own intentions of objectivity. The best you can do is to create a free market place of ideas in which all of these individual interpretations can be presented and argued so that individuals can come to their own consensus, which can itself be subject to criticism and improvement.


dude you just made my eyes bleed and my head hurt

but i think i might understand what your saying

_________________
Image
Image
Image
Sox's assistant and the number one grunt of the NZG
don't mess with a nation that needs medication


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 4:25 am 
Offline
Sergeant Major
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:30 pm
Posts: 431
Location: Hot, hot FL
talhoffer1 wrote:
The best you can do is to create a free market place of ideas in which all of these individual interpretations can be presented and argued so that individuals can come to their own consensus, which can itself be subject to criticism and improvement.


I find it sad and somewhat disturbing that I have had only a single history teacher (pre-college of course) who has embraced that ideal.

_________________
!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:11 am 
Offline
Corporal

Joined: Wed May 24, 2006 7:44 am
Posts: 64
Location: Tennessee
Objective history may be a fleeting goal, but it must be the goal historians strive for. Also, I agree that primary sources are biased, but it must be filtered as much as possible. That is part of the interpretation process in my opinion. From what I can tell, the "free market place of ideas" is alive and well.

_________________
Nothing capable of being memorized is history. - RG Collingwood


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:44 pm 
Offline
2nd Lieutenant

Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:17 pm
Posts: 592
ok i dident read all the stuff before mine, but no history isnt often writen by historians, its written by the victors. ever wonder why dresden brings no perk of ears like the london bombings would, ever wonder why NOBODY over here in our western world knows that stalin probably equaled hitler in a genocide count? well shhheeesh, thats because the criminals there were the victors, and btw, when you win a war, you erase all the nasty stuff you did, and point out all the bad stuff they did.

history itself might not be biased, however people who write it often are..

_________________
No sigs makes threads load faster!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:46 pm 
Offline
Lieutenant Colonel
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 11:22 pm
Posts: 1826
Location: Hayward, Cali
From the view point of someoen else, inaccuracy is inherent to anyone's rendition of history.

History is subjective.

_________________
Go pioneers!

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group