I feel history is non-productive. Do you feel the same way.?

Question

I think that 90% of the problems in the world are caused by people getting all up tight over something that happened thousands of years ago. Things that they can do nothing about.
Historians wrote what they were paid to write. They changed facts, and very important dates.
If we just erased all past history, and quit teaching history we would be a lot better off.
It is said that we learn by our mistakes. Give me an example in world "history".

Answer 1

What a ridiculous point of view. If we didn't pay attention to what made us what we are today, we are likely to make stupid decisions. If we didn't know the consequences of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, would we have dropped another bomb?

Had Hitler listened to his Generals when they warned him about invading Russia, he might have won the war. But he ignored history, and the same thing happened to him that happened to Napoleon.

Answer 2

History must be taught, and learned from. If you don't realize the consequences of your actions, you will do things that lead to horrible results. But if you can look back and learn from what someone before you already tried, you can hopefully find another way.

If you quit teaching history, all you have left is each separate region's local history, which will be passed down whether it's taught in school or not. And that is exactly where the problems are. That kind of history is emotional and usually politically, or culturally biased.

History as a study, is unbiased and non political. It is about what happened, and why? It's not, or shouldn't be, about who was right.

Bye the way, a perfect example of the risks involved in not studying history is Ben's answer. He obviously has no idea what really happened at the end of World War One. In fact the Germans were treated very harshly, and were forced to pay massive reparations to the victors of that war. This resulted in massive economic failures in Germany, which in turn provided the perfect environment for Hitler to work his way into power.

As the saying goes, "those that don't study history are doomed to repeat it."

Answer 3

First, historians (proper ones, at least) do not write only "what they were paid to write." History is an attempt to search for, and accurately record, facts. It is assisted in this by other sciences, such as archeology, anthropology, and even hard science such as chemistry (Carbon-14 dating, e.g.) It is quite true that too often, historical "facts" we all grew up with are nothing of the kind. This is usually a failure to obtain correct information, or reporting a non-fact as true, which the takes on a life of its own (Betsy Ross designing the first U.S. flag, for instance). Napoleon once said something about history being the lies we all agree on. An oversimplification, but not without some truth. Historians, however, cannot change facts or dates (unless they were reported wrong from the beginning). What DOES happen is that they (the facts are reinterpreted based on new information or too often unfortunately, the individual historian's own biases. Much of history is based on individual participant's own words, particularly war memoirs and the like. These will be written according to the lights, and direct experiences of the writer. Human nature being what it is, these will have, at least, a subjective view.

You partially paraphrase Santayana, who spoke of those who fail to learn the lessons of history are condemned to relive it. It is tragic but true that too often, we do NOT learn from past mistakes. This does not make the idea wrong. History presents untold examples of repetitive occurrences. Consider the behavior of the European powers to Hitler. He managed to bluff Britain and France into inaction while he expanded his power and territory. Saddam did much the same in the Middle East (he elicited a "promise" from the U.S. ambassador not to intervene when he invaded Kuwait, for one). One point of studying history is to recognize patterns (technology is changing at a more and more rapid rate; human nature changes VERY slowly. It was said that Moses would not recognize a PC, but he would easily have understood Gorbachev) and respond to them in time to head off bigger problems.

You have a point in that a number (probably less than 90%) of the problems of the world are related to ancient events. The classic example is the Middle East. Leaving Israel out of the mix, there is longstanding friction between the Shia and Sunni sects of Islam. To many, these differences are worthy of death. This has a parallel in the wars of the Reformation and Counter-reformation in the West. Again, an interpretation of religion was at odds with another group's interpretation, and the result was thousands of lives lost over a couple of hundred years. This is "an example."

Speaking as an ardent adherent of Clio (the Muse of history), I read it just because it is interesting and fun! Too many I think get soured on it because of rotten teachers. I hope you can learn to appreciate it for its own sake, and for the lessons it can teach.

Answer 4

I disagree. However before I explain my reasons I will mention that I study archaeology (not 'history'), which could, therefore, be seen as a biased view.

They say 'history repeats itself because no one listens'. If we don't have that history there at all, then errors made in the past will continue to happen again and again. You are correct that fact & some dates are changed but history is nearly always WRITTEN by the winning side. An advantage of archaeology is that it focuses on both 'sides'

Another reason we need history is because it seems to me that you appear to be focusing on the negative incidents in history. What about the positive ones? What about the ABOLISHMENT of slavery? What about ancient and modern technological and industrial ADVANCEMENTS? We are where we are today because of events in history. You cannot erase history or the past, but we can learn from it & use it to improve the future.

~StarQueenEle~

Answer 5

Quite a few things have happened in 'history' that still affect us today and will in the future. It is important therefore to have a trained 'historian' to record and document any treaty or agreement accurately as possible to avoid any possible ambiguity.

The 'treaty' that ended slavery in the USA happened over 140 years ago yet still affects the Afro-American today.

The 'treaty' of Utrecht in 1713 is what shaped and defined the current U.S./Canadian border.

The legacy of ancient Rome to the western world were her laws which still affect the Roman Law countries today.

Again, the definitive explanation for the outcome of battles, the reasoning behind treaties, the understanding of constitutions, the justification for laws & customs, the inceptance of borders between nations, and the reasons for these things so wars don't have to be fought all over again are all explained by the HISTORIAN.

Yet to be a good historian one needs to excel in languages, logic, rhetoric, writing, exposition, and archival methods. History produces tangible documentation using non-tangeble skills.

Answer 6

As Yogi Berra said, "You want to be careful if you don't know where you're going; you might not get there!"
While you are correct that all history reflects the bias of the historian, most (though by no means all) historians attempt to achieve a qualified objectivity.
Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it. There is much we can understand about issues in the world today from understanding what happened long ago, and why.
Here's an example: In 1963, the US escallated the War in Vietnam, attempting to establish by force of arms a democratic form of government in a place that had no history of democracy to build upon. That war dragged on for a decade and cost tens of thousand of American lives, and billions upon billions of dollars. In 2002, unable to learn the lessons of history, the US began an attempt to establish by force of arms a democratic form of government in Iraq. Only those who failed to study history (Bush) could be surprised at the outcome.
So I disagree with you. History is an excellent source of information, and while it should be read with a grain of salt, it should nevertheless be read.

Answer 7

How do you know where you are going if you do not know where you have been? History shows us what works, what does not, what has been tried, what succeeds.
Most historians are not paid to write- they are paid after they write. While no person can escape "having a view point", most people who write history just try and find out the facts and report them.
History is not just important, it is vital.

Answer 8

I understand your anger at people holding grudges for hundreds of years, but most of our problems today stem from our ignorance of things that have been done before. If we would learn from these mistakes. (hhhmmm Vietnam was a big f***in mistake) maybe we would not repeat them. Now we are in an unpopular war everyone is arguing over how to end, while are little boys and girls are dying over there. Sound familiar.

Answer 9

Here is an example: The Allies were very lenient with Germany after World War I. We let Germany stay as one country, and we let them keep and rebuild their armed forces.

Big mistake! Well, you know what happened in 1939.

After World War II Germany was sectioned into four quadrants (later reorganized into the two independent nations).

Answer 10

I think people should get over old problems and not hold grudges but those you dont learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.
past+present=future