Able 15

1. Why is history being rewritten constantly?

History is constantly being rewritten not only because of new facts being found but because of the view that 'history is always written wrong'. With new facts we are presented with new interpretations. Even if new facts aren't presented in a situation different interpretations and reconstruction will appear because of the different views we have on life in comparison to those of the past. "Stories about the dead are inspired by the curiosity of the living."

2. What factors influence the process by which the historian picks and chooses his/her "facts"? Please provide a specific example for each factor.

1. Our interests change: Things that in the past may or may not be interesting to us any more. In the past we may have been more interested in European History, however now Middle East History is what has our curiosity because of the situations in the world today.

2.Our conceptual apparatus changes: We have different physiological views like the Marxist hypothesis, and the Freudian views.

3.Our View of the basic historical segment changes: Many different people from different times periods would disagree on which piece of history is the most important.

4.The 'personal equation' (interests and idiosyncrasies) of the historian changes.

5.The audience for whom he writes changes: this could change his selection and or organizatino

3. What is the "Baconian fallacy?"What would the Positivists think? Would Carr agree with Namier?

The "Baconian Fallacy" is the idea that "all the historians have to do is to collect the facts." (pg 166). The positivists would directly agree with this idea because they believe that history should be taken as a science. That it should not have any influence of bias or perception. Carr would not agree with this statement. Carr believed that historical facts are only useful when they are perceived and interpreted.

4. How does History differ from Geology?

"History differs from Geology in that the historian attributes meaning to his data." pg. 166 Geology is as it is. You can't change it through perception. A mountain is going to be there whether or not you see it as being there or not. However history is facts that can be interpreted and placed together however its interpreter wishes

5. According to Abel: "The patterns to be found in past events are selected by the historian; like the hypothesis of the scientist, they may be suggested, but are neither imposed nor dictated, by "the facts (p. 166-7)." Based on your experience with the Cheques Lab, how far do you agree with this explanation of history?

I was absent on the day of Cheques Lab. However based on what I have heard in class i do agree with this statement. As humans we are drawn to create patterns so that we can better justify our interpretations to fit what we perceive to be right.

6. In your opinion, "how will future historians so elect to describe what is going on now(p. 167)?"

I think we are going to be described as the age of overly outward and slightly paranoid tactics. First there is the war on terrorism, the huge go green actions, the constant commercials on TV for underprivileged children in other countries, and the over reactions to the Swine Flu. The stance on going green and Swine Flu is that if it is not gonna be fixed now, well its bad, who knows what will happen. Also I think that many of the things that seem extremely important now will go unnoticed, and deemed as unimportant in the future.

7. What is historical pluralism?

Historical Pluralism is the large amounts of events that make up larger components that don't necessarily connect and become inter-related. They "[deny] that every event is related to every other event." pg.168

8. The list of events (or non-events) listed on p. 168 makes Abel ask the question: "Is there, then, no hard core or bed-rock of indisputable facts that the historian must recognize." Does it matter if there ever was a man named Trotsky

It does not matter that there was a man named Trostsky. All that really does matter is what occurred based off of his decisions. It could have been any other man that made the same decisions and it would not have happened. Or, even though it is impossible to know this, there is always possibility that what happened to the people surrounding him could have still happened with out his influence.

9. How is a historian like a physicist?

In History just like physics because there will always be out lying variables that will never be known. It is impossible to know everything about both. Also both have to go "beyond the evidence" to explain the results that have occurred to connect them their ultimate results. Also both have to select certain facts and present them in the best way that they felt they are able to describe them.

10. What are the Five Frameworks or Hypotheses of History? Please provide an example from your HL or SL history class of each.

1. Ecclesiastes: Everything gets repeated. Like the treatment towards the Jewish people in the nations that they have lived in.

2. Functional: the idea that some things are isolated and others are stressed. Like race and cultural differences. This can be related to the difference between the Jews and Arabs in Palestine, which is what is greatly focused on when discussing the Palestine Mandate.

3. Progress:The idea that history is fairly new

4. Christian View: History is a drama of sin and redemption

5. Living Organisms:all cultures are 'organically' related.

11. Do you believe in Historical Inevitability?

I do not believe in Historical Inevitability. it is the idea that history has a plot. That people could figure out every historical fact there was to know and could somehow figure out the future events. This cannot be true because people do not act according to plan. Also there is the problem of piecing together these 'plot events' there is no way that human perception would not play a role in this. Hindering any possibilities to correctly view the outcome of anything correctly.

12. What does Abel mean when he says: "No crucial experiment can test the validity of a theory of history, any more than than it can the truth of a metaphysical theory (p. 174)."?

Able is trying to tell us that there is no way to verify history, or any philosophies that come from it. Historical events can not be repeated in exact replica ever so it is impossible to test any of the theories that it has created.

13. Abel writes: "Macaulay regards history as a branch of literature (p. 174)." How would Jill Lepore of Just the Facts, Ma'am respond? Please provide to specific quote from the article to justify your claim.

I dont remember

14. How does the footnote at the bottom of page 175 relate to the Shaper from Grendel?

The footnote at the bottom of the pg at 175 relates to the shaper because it is giving different ideats and views of the past. All of these different views depends on who it is being shared to. Just as the shaper does, he changes the interpretation on events based on who he is telling these stories to.