i d say ninety %, but i always keep in mind what history is. It s a science, it includes research, study and theories. It isnt static, its dynamic. Facts are facts but there is plenty of room for the interpretetion and evaluation of them, from ancient times till today, and thats what history is about.
2006-12-03 08:17:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by Zoe 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Believing history is a process not a thing. It requires your (my, our) participation checking sources to identify that which solid evidence, that which is speculative, that which is false, and that which is yet debatable. Each of these historic determinations have their own degree of acceptance from 100% to zero.
Historic interpretation adds yet another level of acceptance. That interpretation can malevolent or well intentioned. That is, the knowledge and philosophical position of those interpreting must be understood before judging their statements on history.
Finally, we, as the ones doing the final judging have a position through which we are attempting view that history. For example, it is common that people will judge historic events through their personal moral position. Such will "always" skew the historic interpretation. Part of our responsibility is do our best to not apply current standards to past events. If we are willing to enter this process, then the percentage of belief is meaningless.
2006-12-03 11:30:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by Randy 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
History=people. Without them, participating and interpretating the evenements, history would not exist.. A lot depends then on the point of view... However, I would say 90%.
2006-12-03 04:36:25
·
answer #3
·
answered by Lady G. 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
4- It's only the opinion of the eye witness
2006-12-03 09:08:13
·
answer #4
·
answered by JohnRingold 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
I do and I don't A man I greatly admire is the late Winston Churchill who wrote that history was written by the winners
2006-12-03 07:16:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by devora k 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
90%...I realize that history is quite subjective at points to the person's perspective/bias/opinion that record it for us to read, but I think that when a historical event is big enough, it's hard to get the facts too wrong...the basic idea of what happened, what started it and the results are facts, and I don't think they will differ too dramatically between people.
2006-12-03 05:12:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by jennabeanski 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
I would go with 2. Everyone has their own version of what happened, that's why is is hiSTORY. So, it's good to study all the angles. I love learning history.
2006-12-03 04:24:38
·
answer #7
·
answered by BloodCountess 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
I'd choose 1, the other 10% is for the things all scientists are not sure of!
2006-12-03 06:41:30
·
answer #8
·
answered by Be_nice_dude 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's hard to tell what is fact and what is fiction. There are so many lies and myths in history, which makes it impossible to find out the truth. And all accounts, stories, and recollections of historic events are biased.
2006-12-03 04:34:54
·
answer #9
·
answered by NecropolisXR 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
What?
2006-12-03 04:19:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋