Yes, and chivalry included a code for rape and the truth about sleeping beauty is that she was a teenage girl in a coma who was raped by her future husband. Sick and wrong. But the choice is to teach the truth in the right settings or to be a downer and tell everyone who will listen. It's very difficult to see others enjoying chivalry and fairy tales while you know the wicked truth. Definitely write that book. That would be a good and proper method of spreading the truth without necessarily being a downer, depending on how you write it. We can create our own philosophers and fairy tale heroes.
2007-06-15 07:16:33
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Actually, Revisionist History has been around for a very long time.
Revisionist History is the tool by which Historians make people believe that society, social mores, and constructs were always as they are now.
Revisionist History is a big pack of lies, actually.
You should write your book, and tell the truth.
Revisionist history is the thing that tells us the 'real' reason for the Conquests, how evil Chris Columbus was, and how many bi-racial kids Thomas Jefferson had.
None of us knows the absolute truth; we weren't there.
I agree with the poster who said "Leave the history books alone, except for footnotes" (paraphrased).
The texts that we do have, in their original writings, show where we were as a race of humans, and how far we've come.
I do think Nietzsche would have loved Yahoo Answers, though.
After all, Yahoo Answers means absolutely nothing :)
Good luck
2007-06-15 13:08:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by Croa 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think it's very essestial for people in general to do the research and find out who was who before acclaiming kudos and admirmation. There is a lot of history that women have influenced throughout the ages, unfortunately many of the books do not reflect it because a lot of that documentation was bias towards men which is why in history books that are given in High School, very few women are mentioned as great scholars, scientists, explorers, fighters, etc. And by the way Nieche ended up losing his mind towards the end of his life.
2007-06-15 08:05:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by juyish 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Nieztsche also said: "The State is the coldest of all cold creatures. And coldly it lies too. and this lie creeps from it's mouth: "I, The State, am the People". "
If one 're-writes' history are they not merely obfuscating the truth, ameliorating the bad things that have happened and selecting to substitute Their own projection of reality? 'Revise', 'Edit' but never, 'Re-write' history.
Jessica Christ
Norah's Ark
Christine Columbus
Get the basic idea? Don't 're-write' history, annotate it. Leave foot-notes not torn out pages. History is a place where very few of the major protagonists actually got it right even half the time. Do You wish to join Their ranks? After all, "We are all, "Human, All Too Human".
2007-06-15 12:56:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by Ashleigh 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think it does make a difference. I mean, someone referred to the rocket scientist Von Braun as a way of "proving" that men were more innovative...... except, that he was a Nazi. Literally. That kind of changes his contribution to the world, doesn't it? Personally, I think that if a person doesn't treat the people in his life with respect, he's not that great a person to begin with.
Rudy Guiliani cheated on his wife - repeatedly - and admitted to it, announcing his divorce at a press conference before talking to his wife or child about it. That's ONE good reason not to vote for him, IMHO. People are human, of course, but I prefer to know the whole story before I hold someone up as a role model.
I think there are many "gaps" in history classes, based on what you're referring to. I think we can still learn from misogynists, and value their contributions, but it still might be helpful to hear the whole story. Of course, we must remember that historical figures are a product of their times, but it is important to remember the state of Women's rights in the time of Freud, for example, to better understand him.
EDIT: I agree with Ashleigh. "Add to", not rewrite history.
2007-06-15 13:20:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by Junie 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
There is an expression: "Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater" which enables us to select portions of philosophy that work for us, while discarding the parts that don't work for us.
Just don't try to use this concept with a fundamentalist religious zealots. It's all or nothing for them, baby.
2007-06-15 13:59:48
·
answer #6
·
answered by not yet 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
What good does it do ? Are you giving up on Aspirin and modern pharma because almost all of it is based on human experiments ? Are you gonna make the usa close down Nasa because it has been started up by an ex Nazi who employed forced labour to realize his early prototypes of the Saturn V ?
Are you gonna say that what Armstrong put on the moon was the swastika in disguise ?
2007-06-15 08:44:12
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
It's Nietzsche, not Nieche.
2007-06-15 09:25:55
·
answer #8
·
answered by Industrial Psychologist 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Friedrich Nietzche's views on women "Thou goest to woman? Forget not thy whip!" reflect the views of his time. Certainly this does not bear much on the rest of his remarkable and insightful philosophy. When reading his works I disregard the - very few - of his comments on women and focus on what he was attempting to portray.
2007-06-15 08:10:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by Frederick T Gigglesmire 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
don't let hate cloud your thinking. if Albert Einstein was a molester would his scientific work be any less of value. You also do realize the pioneers of NASA space program originated from Nazi WWII scientists. Should we consider NASA a Nazi branch of US govt. X-)
2007-06-15 08:58:22
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋