History as a Science
This article is to piggy back the presentation I made last week on Bury and I feel like it does a good job at describing the topic of History as a science and not as literature. I know we are all in throws of the final weeks and have no time for more reading but if you are doing your paper on Scientific history this isn’t a bad source.
I did my final paper on Marxism. As I was conducting my research, i came across this video. An Entertaining but hard hitting look at how the problems we have today are nothing new,and why leaders throughout our history have warned us and fought against the current type of financial system we have in America Today.
Here is a video on the Overview of the Historical Process. ~~ Nikolay Zherebnenkov
I very much enjoyed the way Beard disassembles Ranke’s theory and authorship. Although I’m focusing my final paper on Rankean theory and empiricism, I find Beard to be an all right read.
Below is a link to J.B. Bury’s (short-166pgs) book called the Idea of Progress where he slides through history and other forms of historiography shedding his parti pris on the majority of major players in the literary field. He also proses a question of whether history is a science or literary based discipline. I know we have discussed this at the beginning of the class but tonight I will be presenting on Bury and would like to hear your opinion on whether you agree or disagree with Bury. Also don’t be afraid to save me from my public speaking pains.
I’ve been studying the philosophy of Rene Girad for the last a couple of weeks. Hopefully you guys find this interview interesting as well. First he is describing the triangular structure of desire,object, model, and subject — Girard tells how conflicts are resolved and why human society is not marked by total conflict all the time. He further speaks of the intersection of the universal themes of mythology and Christianity. History is a test of mankind, says Rene Girard, and mankind is failing that test.
It was funny how he though that the end of the Soviet Union would bring the end of history. Though it is highly criticized right now, there was a video that I also saw in which he talks about how radical Islam is a threat to democracy. I am wondering if anyone else thinks that in away he is rejecting his theory that the end of the Soviet Union is the end of history because right now democracy is in danger as it was when the Soviet Union was in power. ~~ Nikolay Zherebnenkov