In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content: Gould bio Atlantic history is a notoriously fluid construct. There is no static historical unit for Atlantic historians to analyze, no one religion, culture, or political tradition shared by what Bernard Bailyn calls the basin's "multitudinous.
Jun 19, Lissa Notreallywolf rated it really liked it This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. This has been a paradigm changing book for me because it sets, not entirely precisely, the theories of history in American education.
I have read a more scholarly historiography in the past five years, but this book reveals the American battle-ground of historical pedagogy. At the time American farms were dying out, we got the myth of the American Frontiersman, men born freely and of equal rational faculties, going forth in their Conestoga wagons, the Palace on wheels, with a Bible in one hand an This has been a paradigm changing book for me because it sets, not entirely precisely, the theories of history in American education.
At the time American farms were dying out, we got the myth of the American Frontiersman, men born freely and of equal rational faculties, going forth in their Conestoga wagons, the Palace on wheels, with a Bible in one hand and a rifle for killing Indians in the other.
Most of us, in our lived experiences, believe that some of us have more collateral in the mind than others, or at least that we have specific weaknesses, yet we buy into the romantic notion of the Frontier Man, and the solo scientific Genius.
The Frontier men were going to plow the seas of grassland, an action which later led to the Dust Bowl. So they killed off the Plains Indians, and history changed them into the advance troops who would respond to hostile threats to the US. The frontier image is familiar from my childhood, the "buffalo soldiers" used to invade the Philippines more from a postmodern university education.
What is interesting to me is the eulogy of a former way of life, romanticized and used for current concerns. Some of the questions this book poses are these-Do you think history is simply remembering the dates of battles and antagonistic rulers?
Or does it matter who was displaced, moved to a different country and had an influence there that they might not have in their native land? Take heart all those who feel dispossessed, you may have been deported to a place where you can be heard. It has often been those displaced by war who have lead technology and military industrial achievements, and other cultural flowerings.
The authors lean toward the democratic, and the importance of immigration. Science is challenged for not being objective. When one observes who is doing the science, the personal always has a bearing on the outcomes sought and achieved. The cognitive break here is that the root of Facism is collaboration-just think of the facia of muscles.
By the same tenet, the current social historians have taken, comprehending that "no man is an island" in his cognitive processes resulted in the defeat of the Heroic "Frontier man" model of scientific achievements.
I needed to return to the chapters on postmodernism, because the term gives me an intellectual rash. One of the causes of my irritation is that the term is so loosely defined, and usually slung about slanderously.
Reading Telling the Truth clarified the origins of the term and why it is so politically charged. At the core of their argument the authors acknowledge that they were part of the feminization wave of the universities which occurred at about the same time as race lines were challenged by new admission policies.
These instructors were my teachers and the questions they had about the old dead white male paradigm seemed valid. Given that few of my professors ever received tenure, it was clear the masculine paradigm was still largely in place, although the curriculum had changed. Twenty years later its much easier to understand the forces that were operative in my undergraduate education, and this book put that struggle into historical perspective, like another I read several years ago: Culture Wars and the Teaching of the Past.
One of the struggles I have experienced in my lengthy stay in colleges and universities is the difficulty getting a grounding in the DWM- for instance I have read many reactions to Augustine, but have never read Augustine. Lest my alma matters and fellow graduates be offended by this frustration, I was assigned and read "snippets" of both of these philosophers.
With Augustine I know this to be very flexible because his opinions changed over time. This flexibility was part of his appeal, according to some of the history I have read. Their anger I understand clearly. At the core of these "history wars" is too many books and too little time, especially in the classroom.
Information overload started at about the time the printing press was invented, although I am sure some scribe with an aching hand would have some other opinions. Then there is the regretable military-industrial language that is used to describe the discussion.
It would be much nicer to say that I came of intellectual age in the middle of a renaissance period of history where strict alligiance to laboratory science as a model was expanded to include anthropological techniques, psychological insights, voices from sources previously marginalized, and transcending a "might makes right" form of truth telling.
As mysterious as physics may be, no person is as dead as an atom, and even considering particles recently discovered strangeness at being observed, people are a thousand times less predictable. We have many motives, and in the Western world where history is heavily influenced by JudeoChristianIslamic notions of time as a flowing forth, we also have a sense of having a history, and perhaps a place in that history.
All three authors are historians at the University of California.
In the Introduction of this book on page 9 the authors state the purpose as enlightening the readers about the relationship between history and science, objectivity, postmodernism, and politics in democracy influence on identity. However, it is important to remember that these ex Telling the Truth about History was published in by W.
However, it is important to remember that these explanations are bias due to the Western American view. This book was meant for college students as well.The novel Telling the Truth About History by Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt, and Margaret Jacob was published in by Norton Publishing in New York.
Appleby, Hunt, and Jacob’s are historians at the University of California/5. Telling the Truth about History Joyce Appleby, Author, Margaret C.
Jacob, With, Lynn Hunt The authors argue that skepticism and relativism about truth, in science, history and politics, stems. Telling the Truth about History by Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt and Margaret Jacob Norton, pp, £, August , ISBN 0 4 Rarely has the study and teaching of history been the subject of such intense public debate as in the United States today.
Though Atlantic history in its present form grew out of several decades of scholarship on historical topics such as the demography of the African slave trade, the structure of the Atlantic economy, and the transmission of European ideas to America, the work of literary scholars played an important role in conceptualizing the early modern Atlantic as a sort of "imagined community," one sufficiently coherent .
literary critics who espouse postmodernism. Ironically, it is English Joyce Appleby, Lynn Hunt, and Margaret Jacob have managed to explicate the ideas of the critics of the notion of objective truth in clear, understandable prose (no mean feat), to expose the weaknesses Telling the Truth About History.
A ``late-twentieth century understanding of historical truth,'' outlined by three women historians, Appleby (History/UCLA), Hunt (History/UPenn) and Jacob (History/New School for Social Research).