ContentsUnit9Lead-inWarm-upquestions:Howdoyoudefinehistory?Ishistoryascience?Whenwashistoryintroducedtoyouasasubjectatschool?Howwashistorytaughtatthattime?Whydoyouthinkweneedtostudyhistory?Doyoulikehistory?Wouldyouliketobeahistorian?Whyorwhynot?Doyoufindyourselfdisagreewithothers?Whydoyouthinkpeopledisagree?Haveyoueverbeenintroducedtodifferentviewsaboutthesamehistoricalfiguresand/orevents?Ifyes,giveanexampleandexplainwhyviewsdiffer.

Lead-inMorequestionsaboutthetext:1.Inyourexperience,whatcanhistorytellus,apartfromnames,dates,events,andstatistics?2.Doesyourownexperienceoflearninghistorysupporttheargumentthathistoriansoftendisagreesharply?Canyougiveanexample?Whatisthecommonsenseresponsetothedisagreementsabouthistoryaccordingtotheauthors?Howhaveyourespondedtosuchdisagreements?Whydohistoriansdisagree?Isitbecausetheyaretalkingaboutdifferentpeople,differentevents,differentsubjects,ordifferenttimesorplaces?Orisitbecausetheyarenotallusingreliablerecordsorfacts?3.Whatarethethreedefinitionsofhistorymentionedinthetext?Whydotheauthorsofferthreepossibledefinitions?Whichdefinitiondotheyadoptintheirwriting?Lead-inMorequestionsaboutthetext:4.Accordingtotheauthors,historians“selectonlythoserecordstheydeemmostsignificant.”Dotheyusuallyagreeonwhatrecordsaremostsignificant?Whyorwhynot?5.Willhistoriansallagreewitheachotherifthefactstheyusearethesame?Whyisitthathistorianssometimesignoresomefacts?Whatdotheydoifsomeimportantfactsaremissing?Howcantheyachieveanycredibilityinthatcase?6.Theauthorsmaintainthathistorians’disagreementsoftenstemfromdifferentpointsofview,differentperspectives,ordifferenttheoriesofhumanmotivationsandbehavior.WhatdifferentperspectivesdotheauthorsadopttoexplainAmerica’sentryintoWorldWarI?CanyougivesomeotherreasonsofAmerica’sentryintothewarfromthosedifferentperspectives?Lead-inMorequestionsaboutthetext:7.Howdoyouunderstandthestatement“Historianssometimesdisagreebecausetheyarenotreallydiscussingthesamething”inparagraph11?Canyougivesomeexamples?8.Hasthisessaygivenusasatisfactoryanswerastowhyhistoriansdisagree?Canyoulistthepossiblereasonstheauthorsgive?Doyouhaveanythingtoadd?9.Whatshouldwedowhenhistoriansdisagree?Cantheirdifferencesbeeliminated?Shouldtheybe?Howdoweevaluatetheworkofhistorians?10.Ishistoryascience?Canwetakeitasakindofliterature,withalotofhistoricalanecdotestoteachususefulmorallessons?Lookupinadictionarythedefinitionofhistoryandcompareitwiththedefinitionsgivenbytheauthors,andgiveyourcomments?TextWhyHistoriansDisagreeAllenF.DavisandHaroldD.Woodman1.Abouttheauthor2.Background

3.Structure4.GotothetextText1.AbouttheauthorThetextisbasedontheintroductiontoabookentitledConflictandConsensusinModernAmericanHistoryeditedbyAllenF.DavisandHaroldD.Woodman,professorsatTempleUniversityandPurdueUniversityrespectively;thetwoprofessorsco-authoredtheintroduction.2.Background

ThisisamuchcondensedandadaptedversionoftheprefacetothebookConflictandConsensusinModernAmericanHistorycompiledbytwoAmericanhistoryprofessors.Inthispreface,thetwoauthorsdiscussthedefinitionofhistory,theroleofthehistorianandthereasonswhyhistoriansdisagree.TextTheypointoutthecommonmisunderstandingthathistoryisjustnames,datesandstatisticsofthepast,andthatthehistorian’sjobistofindandrememberasmanyofthemaspossible.Theytellusthathistoriansdonotjustcollectfacts.Theygivemeaningtothefacts.Andbecausetheyhavedifferentinterestsanddifferentunderstandingofhumanmotivationandhumanbehaviorwhichinturnisduetotheirdifferentbackgroundinage,sex,race,class,education,religion,politics,etc.,theytendnotonlytobeinterestedindifferentfactsbutalsotointerpretthesamefactsdifferently.Thetwohistoriansthereforeemphasizetheimportanceofunderstandingthehistorians’approach,perspectiveandphilosophyratherthanthefactstheyhaveusedorleftout.TextHistoryisaveryimportantpartofoureducation.Itisnowknowntoallthathowmuchweknowandunderstandthepastlargelydetermineshowmuchandhowwellweknowthepresentandhowfarandhowclearlywecanseeahead.Wemightevensaythatnoonecanbeconsideredproperlyeducatedatallifheorsheknowsnohistory.Chinahasaboutthreethousandyears’uninterruptedrecordedhistoryofwhichweareallproud,andtraditionallyourpeoplehavealwaysattachedgreatimportancetothestudyofhistory.However,formanyreasons,historicaltruthsstillremainundiscovered.Infact,manyhistoricalfactshavedeliberatelybeendestroyed,misinterpretedanddistorted.Thatisonereasonwhyitissoimportantforustoknowwhyhistoriansdisagree.TextText3.Structure

Thetextcanberoughlydividedintothreeparts,whichcanbefurtherdividedintoseveralsections.I.Theintroduction(paras.1–5)1.Misconceptionsaboutthestudyofhistory(paras.1–3)2.Definitionofhistory(paras.4–5)II.Thebody:reasonswhyhistoriansdisagree(paras.6–11)1.Selectionofdifferentfactsaboutthesameevent(para.6)2.Useofthesamefactsfromdifferentpremises(paras.7–10)3.Analysisofdifferentlevelsofcauseandeffect(para.11)III.Theconclusion:inevitabilityofdisagreement(paras.12–13)WhyHistoriansDisagreeAllenF.DavisandHaroldD.Woodman1

Moststudentsareusuallyintroducedtothestudyofhistorybywayofafattextbookandbecomequicklyimmersedinavastseaofnames,dates,eventsandstatistics.Thestudents’skillsarethentestedbyexaminationsthatrequirethemtoshowhowmuchofthedatatheyremember;themoretheyremember,thehighertheirgrades.Fromthisexperienceanumberofconclusionsseemobvious:Thestudyofhistoryisthestudyof“facts”aboutthepast;themore“facts”youknow,thebetteryouareasastudentofhistory.Theprofessionalhistorian

issimplyonewhobringstogetheraverylargenumberof“facts.”Thereforestudentsoftenbecomeconfusedupondiscoveringthathistoriansoftendisagreesharplyevenwhentheyaredealingwiththesameevent.Text2

Theircommonsensereactiontothisstateofaffairsistoconcludethatonehistorianisrightwhiletheotheriswrong.Andpresumably,historianswhoarewrongwillhavetheir“facts”wrong.Thisisseldomthecase,however.Historiansusuallyallarguereasonablyandpersuasively.And,the“facts”—thenames,dates,events,statistics—usuallyturnouttobecorrect.Moreover,theyoftenfindthatcontendinghistoriansmoreorlessagreeonthefacts;thatis,theyusemuchthesamedata.Theycometodifferentconclusionsbecausetheyviewthepastfromadifferentperspective.History,whichseemedtobeacut-and-driedmatterofmemorizing“facts,”nowbecomesamatterofchoosingonegoodinterpretationfromamongmany.Historicaltruthbecomesamatterofpersonalpreference.Text3

Thispositionishardlysatisfying.Theycannothelpbutfeelthattwodiametricallyopposedpointsofviewaboutaneventcannotbothberight;yettheylacktheabilitytodecidebetweenthem.4

Tounderstandwhyhistoriansdisagree,studentsmustconsideraproblemtheyhavemoreorlesstakenforgranted.Theymustaskthemselveswhathistoryreallyis.Text5

Initsbroadestsense,historydenotesthewholeofthehumanpast.Morerestrictedisthenotionthathistoryistherecordedpast,thatis,thatpartofhumanlifewhichhasleftsomesortofrecordsuchasfolktales,artifacts,orwrittendocuments.Finally,historymaybedefinedasthatwhichhistorianswriteaboutthepast.Ofcoursethethreemeaningsarerelated.Historiansmustbasetheiraccountsontheremainsofthepast,leftbypeople.Obviouslytheycannotknoweverythingforthesimplereasonthatnoteveryevent,everyhappening,wasfullyandcompletelyrecorded.Thereforethehistoriancanonlyapproximatehistoryatbest.Noonecaneverclaimtohaveconcludedthequest.6

Butthisdoesnotsayenough.Ifhistorianscannotknoweverythingbecausenoteverythingwasrecorded,neitherdotheyusealltherecordsthatareavailabletothem.Rather,theyselectonlythoserecordstheydeemmostsignificant.Moreover,theyalsorecreatepartsofthepast.Likedetectives,theypiecetogetherevidencetofillinthegapsintheavailablerecords.Text7

Historiansareabletoselectandcreateevidencebyusingsometheoryofhumanmotivationsandbehavior.Sometimesthisappearstobeeasy,requiringverylittlesophisticationandsubtlety.Thus,forexample,historiansinvestigatingAmerica’sentryintoWorldWarIwouldprobablyfindthatthesinkingofAmericanmerchantshipsonthehighseasbyGermansubmarineswasrelevanttotheirdiscussion.Atthesametime,theywouldmostlikelynotuseevidencethatPresidentWoodrowWilsonwasdissatisfiedwithanewhatheboughtduringthefirstmonthsof1917.Thechoiceastowhichfacttouseisbasedonatheory—admittedly,inthiscasearathercrudetheory,butatheorynonetheless.Itwouldgosomethinglikethis:Nationalleaderscontemplatingwararemorelikelytobeinfluencedbybelligerentactsagainsttheircountriesthanbytheirunhappinesswiththeirhaberdashers.Text8

Ifthechoiceswereassimpleasthis,theproblemwouldbeeasilyresolved.Butthechoiceswerenotsoeasytomake.HistoriansinvestigatingtheUnitedStates’entryintoWorldWarIwillfindinadditiontoGermansubmarinewarfareawholeseriesofotherfactsthatcouldberelevanttotheeventunderstudy.Forinstance,theywillfindthattheBritishgovernmenthadapropagandamachineatworkintheUnitedStatesthatdiditsbesttowinpublicsupportfortheBritishcause.TheywilldiscoverthatAmericanbankershadmadelargeloanstotheBritish,loansthatwouldnotberepaidintheeventofaBritishdefeat.Theywillreadoftheinterceptionofthe“ZimmermannNote,”inwhichtheGermanforeignsecretaryorderedtheGermanministerinMexico,intheeventofwar,tosuggestanalliancebetweenGermanyandMexicowherebyMexico,withGermansupport,couldwinbackterritorytakenfromMexicobytheUnifiedStatesintheMexicanWar.TheywillalsofindamongmanyAmericanpoliticalleadersadeepconcernoverthebalanceofpowerinEurope,abalancethatwouldbedestroyed—toAmerica’sdisadvantage—iftheGermanswereabletodefeattheFrenchandtheBritishandthereby

emergeasthesolemajorpowerinEurope.Text9

Whatthenarehistorianstomakeofthesefacts?Onegroupcouldsimplylistthem.Bydoingso,theywouldbemakingtwoimportantassumptions:(1)thosefactstheyputontheirlistarethemainreasons,whilethosetheydonotlistarenotimportant;and(2)thosethingstheyputontheirlistareofequalimportanceinexplainingtheU.S.role.Butanothergroupofhistoriansmightarguethatthelistisincompleteinthatitdoesnottakeintoaccountthegenerallypro-BritishviewsofWoodrowWilson,viewsthatstemmedfromthePresident’sbackgroundandeducation.Theresultwillbeadisagreementamongthehistorians.Moreover,becausethesecondgroupraisesthequestionofWilson’sviews,theywillfindanumberofrelevantfactsthatthefirstgroupwouldignore.TheywillconcernthemselveswithWilson’seducation,theinfluenceofhisteachers,thebooksheread,andthebookshewrote.Inshort,althoughbothgroupsofhistoriansaredealingwiththesamesubjecttheywillcometodifferentconclusionsandusedifferentfactstosupporttheirpointsofview.Thefactsselected,andthoseignored,willdependnotontheproblemstudiedbutonthepointsofviewofthehistorians.Text10

Similarlyathirdgroupofhistoriansmightmaintainthatthevariousitemsonthelistshouldnotbegivenequalweight,thatoneofthereasonslisted,say,bankers’loans,wasmostimportant.Thetheoryherewouldbethateconomicmattersarethekeytohumanmotivation,andthatasmallnumberofwealthybankershaveadisproportionateabilitytoinfluencegovernment.11

Intheexamplesgiven,historiansdisagreebecausetheybeginfromdifferentpremises.Butthereisstillanotherrealmofdisagreementwhichstemsfromsomethingratherdifferent.Historianssometimesdisagreebecausetheyarenotreallydiscussingthesamething.Oftentheyaremerelyconsideringdifferentlevelsofcauseandeffect.Supposetheteacheraskedyou“Whywereyoulateforclassthismorning?”“Iwaslateforclass,”youexplained,“becauseIoverslept.”O(jiān)rtouseahistoricalexample,“TheCivilWarbeganbecauseSouthCarolinashorebatteriesopenedfireonthefederalgarrisonatFortSumteronApril12,1861.”Neitherstatementcanbefaultedonthegroundsthatitisinaccurate;atthesametime,however,neitherissufficientasanexplanationoftheeventbeingconsidered.TextThenextquestionisobvious:Whydidyouoversleep,orwhydidrelationsbetweenonestateandthefederalgovernmentreachthepointwheredifferenceshadtobesettledbyWar?Inotherwords,wehavetogobeyondtheproximatecauseandprobefurtherandfurther.Butaswedigmoredeeplyintotheproblem,theanswerbecomesmoredifficultandcomplex.Intheend,youmightarguethattheultimatecauseofyourbeinglatewasthefactthatyouwereborn,butobviouslythisgoestoofarbacktobemeaningful.Thatyouwerebornisofcourseanecessaryfactor,butitisnotasufficientfactor;itdoesnotreallytellenoughtoexplainyourbehaviortoday.SimilarlyyoucouldtracethecauseoftheCivilWarbacktothediscoveryofAmerica,butagain,thatisanecessarybutnotasufficientcause.Thepointatwhichcausesarebothnecessaryandsufficientisnotself-evident.Thereforehistoriansmayagaindisagreeaboutwheretobegintheanalysis.Bynowstudentsshouldseethatthewell-usedphrase“l(fā)etthefactsspeakforthemselves”hasnorealmeaning.Thefactsdonotspeakforthemselves;historiansusethefactsinaparticularwayandthereforethey,andnotthefacts,aredoingthespeaking.Text12

Historiansnotonlyoftendisagreewithothers.Theyoftendisagreewiththemselves.Indeedtheyareoftenrevisingtheirideas.Theyhavetodosobecausetheyareconstantlydiscoveringnewinformation,gainingnewinsightsfromothersocialscientistsandmasteringandusingnewtechniques.Historiansalsolearnfromeachotherandbenefitfrominternationalcomparisonsofsimilareventsandinstitutions.Text13

Canweeliminatealldisagreement?Ifthestateofourknowledgeweresuchthatitprovideduswithamodelofunquestionedvaliditythatcompletelyexplainedhumanbehavior,wecould.Butsincewedonothavesuchacompleteandfoolproofexplanation,disagreementsaredestinedtoremain.Whenstudentsrealizethatthereisnooneeasyanswertotheproblemshistoriansraiseandthat“truth”isbutanelusiveyetintriguinggoalinanever-endingquest,theywillfindthestudyofhistorytobeasignificant,exhilarating,andusefulpartoftheireducation.(1,627words)Text歷史學(xué)家們?yōu)楹我庖娪蟹制绨瑐悺.戴維斯哈羅德·D.伍德曼1

大多數(shù)學(xué)生一般都是通過厚厚一大本教科書開始學(xué)習(xí)歷史的，接著很快就陷入名字、日期、事件和數(shù)據(jù)的汪洋大海當中。然后學(xué)生的技能通過考試來檢查，這類考試要求他們表明自己記住了多少數(shù)據(jù)；記住的東西越多，得分就越高。根據(jù)這樣的經(jīng)歷，似乎可以得出幾條明顯的結(jié)論：學(xué)習(xí)歷史就是學(xué)習(xí)過去的“事實”；你知道的“事實”越多，你的歷史就學(xué)得越好。專業(yè)的歷史學(xué)家不過是能收集到大量“事實”的人。因此，當學(xué)生發(fā)現(xiàn)歷史學(xué)家們即使對同一個事件的意見也往往有嚴重分歧時，常常會感到困惑。Text2

他們根據(jù)常識對此作出判斷，認為其中一個歷史學(xué)家是對的，另一個則是錯的。并且他們會認為，錯的那些歷史學(xué)家所掌握的“史實”肯定也是錯的。實際上，情況很少如此。歷史學(xué)家們的論證通常都合情合理，具有說服力。而且，名字、日期、事件、數(shù)據(jù)這樣的“事實”，通常都正確無誤。不僅如此，他們還常常發(fā)現(xiàn)，那些意見相左的歷史學(xué)家們或多或少都認同這些史實；也就是說，他們使用的基本上是同樣的資料。他們之所以得出不同的結(jié)論是因為他們看待歷史的角度不同。原先歷史似乎只是一件記住“史實”的事，但這么一來卻變成一件從很多解釋當中挑選一種好的解釋的事了。歷史真理變成了一種個人喜好。Text3

這種解釋自然很難令人滿意。人們難免會覺得，對一個事件的兩種針鋒相對的觀點不可能都是正確的，但他們又沒有能力判斷孰是孰非。4

為了了解歷史學(xué)家為何有分歧，學(xué)生們必須考慮一個他們一直都或多或少認為理所當然的問題。他們必須問問自己，歷史究竟是什么。Text5

廣義而言，歷史是指人類過去的一切。如果加以限定，歷史是指留有記錄的過去，也就是說，人類生活中留下記載的那部分，諸如民間故事、各類手工藝品及書面文件等。最后，歷史還可以定義為歷史學(xué)家對人類過去的描述。這三種意思當然是互相關(guān)聯(lián)的。史學(xué)家的闡述必須以過去人們留下的記載為依據(jù)。他們顯然不可能知道過去的一切，理由很簡單，因為并不是大大小小每一件事都有全面完整的記錄。因此歷史學(xué)家最多也只能是接近歷史。無人能宣稱已經(jīng)終結(jié)了對它的探索。6

但是，這個解釋還不夠。歷史學(xué)家不可能什么都知道，因為過去的一切并非都有記載。不僅如此，歷史學(xué)家對手頭的材料也并不會都采用，而僅僅選擇他們認為最為重要的記錄。此外，他們還會重建過去的某些部分。就像偵探那樣，他們把已有證據(jù)串在一起，填補現(xiàn)有紀錄中的空白。Text7

歷史學(xué)家能夠利用某個有關(guān)人類動機和行為的理論選擇并創(chuàng)造證據(jù)。這有時似乎十分簡單，并不需要什么深奧的學(xué)問和妙思。舉例來說，研究美國參加第一次世界大戰(zhàn)原因的史學(xué)家，很可能會認為德國潛水艇擊沉在公海航行的美國商船這一事件與他們的研究相關(guān)。同時，他們絕不會拿伍德羅·威爾遜總統(tǒng)對他1917年頭幾個月里買的一頂帽子的不滿來作為證據(jù)。選擇使用哪一種事實需要有理論依據(jù)——誠然，這是一種十分不成熟的理論，但仍然是一個理論。這理論大致是說，對正在考慮戰(zhàn)爭問題的國家領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人來說，他們的決策更可能取決于針對他們國家的戰(zhàn)爭行為，而非他們對衣帽商的不滿。Text8

假如選擇都如此簡單，問題就不難解決了。但實際上，做選擇并不容易。研究美國參加第一次世界大戰(zhàn)問題的史學(xué)家們會發(fā)現(xiàn)，除了德國的潛水艇戰(zhàn)，還有其他一系列的史實與所研究的問題有關(guān)。比如，他們會發(fā)現(xiàn)，英國政府有一個宣傳機器活躍在美國，它不遺余力地爭取美國公眾對英國的支持。他們會發(fā)現(xiàn)美國的銀行家們在英國有巨額貸款，一旦英國戰(zhàn)敗，這些貸款就不可能得到償還。他們還會了解到截獲“齊默曼外交照會”一事，里面提到當時德國外交部部長命令其駐墨西哥公使，一旦德美開戰(zhàn)，就向?qū)Ψ浇ㄗh建立德墨同盟，根據(jù)該同盟條約，墨西哥可以在德國的支持下奪回在墨西哥戰(zhàn)爭中被美國占領(lǐng)的領(lǐng)土。他們還會發(fā)現(xiàn)，很多美國政治領(lǐng)袖對歐洲的實力平衡懷有深深的關(guān)切。如果德國人真能擊敗英法從而成為歐洲唯一的主要強國，這一平衡就會被破壞，這對美國極其不利。Text9

那么，史學(xué)家們?nèi)绾问褂眠@些事實呢？有一派會干脆將它們羅列起來。他們這樣做，實際上是作出了兩個重要的假設(shè)：（1）他們羅列的都是主要理由，而沒有羅列的都不重要；（2）在解釋美國扮演的角色時，他們所列的理由都同等重要。但是另外一派史學(xué)家會爭辯說，表上所列事實不完整，因為它沒有考慮到伍德羅·威爾遜因其出身背景和所受教育而形成的總體上親英的觀點。這么一來，史學(xué)家之間就會產(chǎn)生意見分歧。而且，由于第二派史學(xué)家提出了威爾遜的個人觀點這一問題，他們就會找到許多第一派史學(xué)家所忽視的史實。他們會關(guān)注威爾遜所受的教育、他的老師對于他的影響、他看過的書、他所寫的書。總之，雖然兩派史學(xué)家探討的是同一個問題，他們?nèi)匀粫贸霾煌慕Y(jié)論，而且會用不同的史實來支持他們的觀點。至于選什么，不選什么，并不是取決于他們所研究的問題，而是他們所持的觀點。Text10

同樣地，第三派史學(xué)家也許會認為，所列各項不能同等看待，而其中某個理由——比如說銀行家的貸款——才是最重要的。這里所依據(jù)的理論是經(jīng)濟是人類的關(guān)鍵動機，并且，極少數(shù)富有的銀行家對政府有著與其人數(shù)極不成比例的影響力。11

在上面所舉的例子中，史學(xué)家們之所以意見不同，是因為他們分析問題的前提不同。但是，還有一種分歧是由完全不同的原因產(chǎn)生的。史學(xué)家們有時看法不同是因為實際上他們談?wù)摰牟皇峭患虑椤ＭǔＫ麄兛紤]的是不同層次的因果關(guān)系。假如，老師問你“你今天上午為什么遲到？”你會解釋說，“我上課遲到是因為我睡過頭了。”我們換個有關(guān)歷史的例子吧，“美國內(nèi)戰(zhàn)的爆發(fā)是因為南卡羅萊納州的海岸炮兵部隊在1861年4月12號向駐守在薩姆特要塞的聯(lián)邦部隊開火。”以上兩個例子中的原因，都不能以不精確為由被說成是錯的；但同時，兩者都不足以用來解釋相關(guān)問題。……Text

……很明顯，接下去的問題是：你為什么會睡過頭？或者，為什么一個州政府和聯(lián)邦政府的關(guān)系會發(fā)展到必須通過戰(zhàn)爭來解決分歧的地步？換句話說，我們得超越近因，更深層次地探究下去。但當我們對問題挖掘得越深，答案就會變得越難、越復(fù)雜。到最后，你也許會說，你遲到歸根結(jié)底是因為你來到了這個世界上，但是這明顯扯得太遠了，沒有任何意義。你的出生當然是一個必要因素，但是這個因素并不充分，它不足以解釋你今天的行為。同樣，你可以把內(nèi)戰(zhàn)的原因追溯到美洲新大陸的發(fā)現(xiàn)，但那也只是一個必要而非充分的原因。究竟在哪一點上，理由既必要又充分，這就不是那么顯而易見了。所以史學(xué)家們可能對應(yīng)該從什么地方開始分析又有分歧。說到這里，學(xué)生們應(yīng)該明白，人們常說的那句“讓事實說話”并無任何實際意義。事實自己不會說話；是史學(xué)家在以一種特殊的方式使用事實，因此，是他們在說話，而不是事實。Text12

史學(xué)家們不僅會與他人有分歧，他們還常常和自己意見相左。實際上，他們常常在修訂自己的觀點。他們不得不這么做，因為他們總會不斷發(fā)現(xiàn)新的信息，從其他社會科學(xué)家那里不斷獲得新的見解，而且不斷掌握、使用新技術(shù)。史學(xué)家們還互相學(xué)習(xí)，而且從國際上對相似事件和制度的比較中獲益。Text13

我們能夠消除所有的意見分歧嗎？如果我們掌握的知識能給我們提供一個可以完全解釋人類行為的絕對有效的模式，那么答案是肯定的。但是，既然我們沒有這樣一種完全可靠的、萬無一失的解釋，意見分歧注定會繼續(xù)存在。當學(xué)生們認識到，史學(xué)家們所提出的問題并沒有一個簡單答案，而真理只是永無休止的探索中一個雖然迷人但卻難以達到的目標，他們才會發(fā)現(xiàn)歷史研究是他們所受的教育中一個重要的、令人激動的、有益的組成部分。Text

Moststudentsareusuallyintroducedtothestudyofhistorybywayofafattextbookandbecomequicklyimmersedinavastseaofnames,dates,eventsandstatistics.Formoststudents,theybegintheirstudyofhistorywithathicktextbookinwhichthereareagreatnumberofnames,datesandstatisticsforthemtoremember.bywayof:through;byrouteof經(jīng)由e.g.

YoucangetthisinformationbywayoftheInternet.Cf.

bywayof:

asameansof當作e.g.1.Hesenthersomeflowersbywayofanapology.2.I’dliketosayafewwordsbywayofself-introduction.3.Theydecidedtogiveapartybywayofwelcometothedistinguishedguests.TextAnalysis

Moststudentsareusuallyintroducedtothestudyofhistorybywayofafattextbookandbecomequicklyimmersedinavastseaofnames,dates,eventsandstatistics.fat:thick;widee.g.afatperson/man/woman/child;afatbook/volume;afatsalary;afatcigar;afatcheckNote:Payattentiontothesubtledifferencesbetweenthesewords:fat,plump,chubby,stoutandobese.Rememberthatitisnotpolitetosaysomebodyisfat.Amorepolitewayistosaythatheorsheisratheroverweightorheavy.“Stout”alsomeans“slightlyfat.”Forchildrenandwomenwhoareslightlyandpleasantlyfat,wecanusetheword“plump.”Anotherpleasantwordforbabiesandchildrenis“chubby.”Thestrongestwordis“obese,”anditisalsothewordusedoftenbydoctors.TextAnalysis

Moststudentsareusuallyintroducedtothestudyofhistorybywayofafattextbookandbecomequicklyimmersedinavastseaofnames,dates,eventsandstatistics.beimmersedin:becompletelycoveredorsubmergedinaliquid;bedeeplyinvolvedorabsorbede.g.1.I’mimmersedinthisproject.2.Theideaistohavethestudentsimmersedinanideallearningenvironment.3.Theydecidedtogiveapartybywayofwelcometothedistinguishedguests.avastseaof:agreatamountofTextAnalysis

Thestudents’skillsarethentestedbyexaminationsthatrequirethemtoshowhowmuchofthedatatheyremember;themoretheyremember,thehighertheirgrades.testedbyexaminations:evaluatedbywayofexaminationsNoticehowrepetitionisavoidedbyusingsynonyms.data:thepluralformof“datum”Also:

medium(media);curriculum(curricula);phenomenon(phenomena);criterion(criteria);stratum(strata);bacterium(bacteria)themoretheyremember,thehighertheirgrades:Payattentiontothispatternofcomparison.After“themore...themore...”thewordordershouldbethesameasinastatement.Inthissentence,“willbe”hasbeenomittedafter“thehighertheirgrades.”TextAnalysis

Theprofessionalhistorianissimplyonewhobringstogetheraverylargenumberof“facts.”simply:only;nothingbute.g.

Itissimplyamatteroftime.Cf.1.Helivedverysimply.(inaplainandordinaryway)2.It’ssimplyimpossible.(usedtoemphasizewhatthespeakerissaying)3.Shewasaskedtoexpressherselfmoresimply.(inawaythatiseasytounderstand)bringtogether:gathertogether;collect“facts”:

Thequotationmarksindicatethattheauthorsdonotthinkthattherearepure“facts.”Theyhavetobearranged,sortedoutandgivenmeaningbyprofessionalhistorians.TextAnalysis

Thereforestudentsoftenbecomeconfusedupondiscoveringthathistoriansoftendisagreesharplyevenwhentheyaredealingwiththesameevent.Thereforewhentheydiscoverthathistoriansoftendisagreecompletelyeventhoughtheyaretalkingaboutthesameevent,theyoftencannotunderstandthereason.upondiscovering:(fml)whentheydiscoverdisagreesharply:disagreeseriously,bitterlyTextAnalysis

Theircommonsensereactiontothisstateofaffairsistoconcludethatonehistorianisrightwhiletheotheriswrong.theircommonsensereaction:theirresponsebasedoncommonsenseastateofaffairs:asituatione.g.1.Thisisaveryunpleasantstateofaffairs.2.Thereisnotmuchwecandointhepresentstateofaffairs.while:whereasTextAnalysis

Moreover,theyoftenfindthatcontendinghistoriansmoreorlessagreeonthefacts…moreover:besides;what’smore;notonlythat;inaddition;apartfromthatcontendinghistorians:historianswhoarefightingordebatingmoreorless:almost;anundetermineddegreee.g.1.Thisproblemismoreorlesssettled.2.Theymoreorlessagreetoreopentheirdiscussionsontheborderdispute.Cf.Ouraverageannualincomebythattimewillbe4,000USD,moreorless.(approximately)TextAnalysis

Theycometodifferentconclusionsbecausetheyviewthepastfromadifferentperspective.Peoplelookatthepastfromdifferentpointsofview,angles,approaches,perspectivesortheoreticalstances.Thesewordsconveymoreorlessthesamemeaning.Couldyougivemoreexamplestoshowhowdifferentperspectivescanleadtodifferentconclusionsintheinterpretationofhistoricaleventsorfigures?Also,trytothinkofyourownexamples.TextAnalysis

Historicaltruthbecomesamatterofpersonalpreference.personalpreference:personallikesordislikes;sth.thatsb.likesmorethananyotherthing

Cf.

historical:oforrelatingtohistoryhistoric:havingconsiderableimportanceorinfluenceinhistoryeconomical:notwastefulorextravaganteconomic:oforrelatingtotheeconomyoreconomicsTextAnalysis

Thispositionishardlysatisfying.Thisisnotasatisfyingopinion.Studentsexpecttobegivenclear-cutanswers,eitheryesorno.Butnowtheyhavetoshoparoundfortheproperanswer.Theanswerbecomesapersonalchoice.Thismakesthemfeelveryuncomfortable.TextAnalysis

Theycannothelpbutfeelthattwodiametricallyopposedpointsofviewaboutaneventcannotbothberight…cannothelpbutfeel:cannothelpfeeling;canonlyfeeldiametricallyopposed:absolutelyorirreconcilablyopposed;completelydifferent;polesapartTextAnalysis

Morerestrictedisthenotionthathistoryistherecordedpast,thatis,thatpartofhumanlifewhichhasleftsomesortofrecordsuchasfolktales,artifacts,orwrittendocuments.Inamorerestrictedsense,historyisunderstoodastherecordedpast.thatis:inotherwordsfolktales:Rememberthatwrittendocumentswereimpossiblebeforewrittenlanguageandpaperwereinvented.Theonlyrecordlefttousisintheformoffolktalesandartifacts.TextAnalysis

Finally,historymaybedefinedasthatwhichhistorianswriteaboutthepast.Finally,historymaybedescribedaswhathistorianshavewrittenaboutourpast.Itmeansthathistoryishumanpastthroughtheeyesofhistorians.Historyrequiresthecombinationoftwofactors:theobjectivefactsandthesubjectiveselection,arrangement,andinterpretationofthembyhistorians.Thisiswhyhistoriansoftendisagree.Anditisinthissensethatweoftensaythateveryonetendstowritehisownhistory.TextAnalysis

Obviouslytheycannotknoweverythingforthesimplereasonthatnoteveryevent,everyhappening,wasfullyandcompletelyrecorded.Manyeventsandhappeningswerenotfullyandcompletelyrecordedbecausepeopleatthetimedidnothavethetime,energy,interestorthenecessarymeans.Oftentheywerenotrecordedbecausetheywereconsideredtootrivial,tooembarrassing,ortoodangeroustobeknown.Manyrecordshavealsobee