"History is a set of lies people have agreed upon? To what extent is this statment accurate? Include this: Exploration and colonial settlement. Please help me, this is my summer assignment!!! I...

"History is a set of lies people have agreed upon?

To what extent is this statment accurate?

Include this: Exploration and colonial settlement.

Please help me, this is my summer assignment!!! I will really appreciate it....!!!!!

THANK SO MUCH

Asked on

21 Answers | Add Yours

litteacher8's profile pic

Posted on

For a long time, we viewed Columbus as a hero and saw Missions as quaint. The Oregon Trail was an adventure. Although these are not lies, specifically, they were perpetrated by history books and bedtime stories because they were romantic and simple.
litteacher8's profile pic

Posted on

For a long time, we viewed Columbus as a hero and saw Missions as quaint. The Oregon Trail was an adventure. Although these are not lies, specifically, they were perpetrated by history books and bedtime stories because they were romantic and simple.
brettd's profile pic

Posted on

History is in the eye of the beholder, and one person's immutable truth is another person's dastardly lie.  So sure, the quote is accurate, and also completely wrong, depending on your historical perspective.

Also, the word "lie" conveys something intentional, a deliberate attempt to mislead and distort for some nefarious purpose.  And while I'm sure this does happen and is happening at times even now, I don't find most historians all that malicious.  I think the "lies" stem much more from the passage of time and the lack of firsthand evidence to base a better assumption on.

shaketeach's profile pic

Posted on

One must remember that it is the "winners" who write the history of an event.  For example, in viewing our own history and and the westward expansion, we (the winners) minimize the fact that we committed genocide in obtaining the land.  We justify it all by saying it was only a million people and they didn't need it all.  The native people of this country view it from an entirely different perspective.  The genocide for them was 20-30 million people.  Just how many died as a result of taking the land is anybody's guess.  Was it a million?  Was it 30 million?  The truth is somewhere between.  Rarely in a history book do we read that our government made treaties that they had no intention of keeping.  How many history books tell about the blankets tainted with smallpox?  We demonized these people at the time so we could feel better about treating them in such a vile way.  They weren't considered human.  We, as a country,  have never addressed this part of our past.  We have excepted the "lies" since it is more convenient.  Today, we call this spin.  

 

kapokkid's profile pic

Posted on

Perhaps another answer is that generally, victors write the history.  If our history books had been written by Native Americans, you can imagine how differently they would read and what we might think differently about the people who settled and colonized the Eastern US.  The same would go for the history of the world if history was written and spread by those who were "colonized" rather than those who did the colonizing.

The fact is, those minority or less powerful perspectives are rarely if ever heard, so you could certainly classify much of what we pass off as the "truth" of history as lies because you just don't get the other perspective and as the previous poster said, no one can avoid bias.

Perhaps the most important lesson you might take from this inquiry is that there is no such thing as truth in history and this is a very important basis for any real examination or study of that subject.

akannan's profile pic

Posted on

The previous post was fairly accurate.  It's the "lies" word that is going to be a challenge in the statement.  It might be right and completely valid, but proving it is going to require substantiation that will prove without a doubt that events such as exploration and colonial settlement were consciously designed to increase indigenous people's suffering, drive profits through the ceiling, and that this conspiracy was deliberate.  Finding evidence to prove this is going to be a challenge.  I think that the statement is fairly accurate.  I would also say that while the wording might be a challenge, the idea of history meaning one thing to one individual or set of people and meaning another to an alternate group or individual is quite valid.  The aspect of colonial settlement meant one set of truths to the parent nation.  Increased political influence, wealth, and substantiation of nationalism might be one set of realities that were experienced.  This was a historical reality.  On the other side, the idea of oppression and being forced into violations of political, civil, and/ or economic rights were another set of realities experienced by those who were colonized.  In this light, one can see the basic idea of the statement in that history means different realities to different individuals.

auntlori's profile pic

Posted on

I've heard this quote before, and I suppose to some extent it's true.  "Lies" is such a strong word; however, every story (and that's what history is, a collection of stories) has more than one perspective. 

You may have read the poem in which six blind men are each touching an elephant, trying to figure out what, exactly the creature is.  One touches its side and says it's like a wall; one touches the tusk and says it's like a spear; the next touches the trunk and believes it's like a snake...and the list goes on (I've included the link below, in case you're interested).  My point is that we all see things a little differently based on our perspectives, our biases, our experiences, and whatever else has shaped us into the beings we are. 

So, when we're looking back at...let's say...a war, people will of course have different views as to who started it and why.  Only from the vantage point of time can there be any kind of merging of the views into what passes for truth--and history.

Think specifically of something like the famous "shot heard 'round the world."  There are all kinds of opinions about who shot and why.  Or what, exactly, caused the Civil War?  Once "history" settles on answers to questions like these, it may or may not be the truth, but it's the "lie" we've settled on. 

This same concept applies to whichever period in history you happen to be studying. Hope this helps get you started!

jackwidow's profile pic

Posted on

In reply to #5:

OH MY GOD. You use the "G" and 20-30 million people with the "J" word and you don't get shot at with like a canon. You could be dead for saying that he. I glad you did say I am shock some else knows what did happen on American soil. Very nice work there. Spin baby spin! YEH!

You use the "G" and 20-30 million people with ( NOT i forgot not sorry)

the "J"

jackwidow's profile pic

Posted on

Part 5

I do know what you plan to do with your life but I hope you do better then what teachers  I saw here because you are the future don't listen to auntlori that teacher is not going to help ever stay away from poeple like that.

jackwidow's profile pic

Posted on

History is in the eye of the beholder, and one person's immutable truth is another person's dastardly lie.  So sure, the quote is accurate, and also completely wrong, depending on your historical perspective.

Also, the word "lie" conveys something intentional, a deliberate attempt to mislead and distort for some nefarious purpose.  And while I'm sure this does happen and is happening at times even now, I don't find most historians all that malicious.  I think the "lies" stem much more from the passage of time and the lack of firsthand evidence to base a better assumption on.

I do like what you said but you left hole in the answer. I really need more input from or is that you final answer because in that I call trash. Sure ever thing is in the eye of the beholder but the students here don't have much to beholder so we need to show some thing to beholdeing too. Well like what do you mean by "lie conveys something intentional, a deliberate attempt to mislead and distort for some nefarious purpose". OK I think I get but do the student get it well like a for insistence he lie .... (HOLES) I mean you are a teacher are you not and you have to show us what you mean then.

jackwidow's profile pic

Posted on

One must remember that it is the "winners" who write the history of an event.  For example, in viewing our own history and and the westward expansion, we (the winners) minimize the fact that we committed genocide in obtaining the land.  We justify it all by saying it was only a million people and they didn't need it all.  The native people of this country view it from an entirely different perspective.  The genocide for them was 20-30 million people.  Just how many died as a result of taking the land is anybody's guess.  Was it a million?  Was it 30 million?  The truth is somewhere between.  Rarely in a history book do we read that our government made treaties that they had no intention of keeping.  How many history books tell about the blankets tainted with smallpox?  We demonized these people at the time so we could feel better about treating them in such a vile way.  They weren't considered human.  We, as a country,  have never addressed this part of our past.  We have excepted the "lies" since it is more convenient.  Today, we call this spin.  

 

OH MY GOD. You use the "G" and 20-30 million people with the "J" word and you don't get shot at with like a canon. You could be dead for saying that he. I glad you did say I am shock some else knows what did happen on American soil. Very nice work there. Spin baby spin! YEH!

jackwidow's profile pic

Posted on

Perhaps another answer is that generally, victors write the history.  If our history books had been written by Native Americans, you can imagine how differently they would read and what we might think differently about the people who settled and colonized the Eastern US.  The same would go for the history of the world if history was written and spread by those who were "colonized" rather than those who did the colonizing.

The fact is, those minority or less powerful perspectives are rarely if ever heard, so you could certainly classify much of what we pass off as the "truth" of history as lies because you just don't get the other perspective and as the previous poster said, no one can avoid bias.

Perhaps the most important lesson you might take from this inquiry is that there is no such thing as truth in history and this is a very important basis for any real examination or study of that subject.

I will add you gave a list of some facts and very up front and frank short but frank I could call you a teacher a less next what I seen so far.

Nice work with no song and dance or poems.

jackwidow's profile pic

Posted on

I've heard this quote before, and I suppose to some extent it's true.  "Lies" is such a strong word; however, every story (and that's what history is, a collection of stories) has more than one perspective. 

You may have read the poem in which six blind men are each touching an elephant, trying to figure out what, exactly the creature is.  One touches its side and says it's like a wall; one touches the tusk and says it's like a spear; the next touches the trunk and believes it's like a snake...and the list goes on (I've included the link below, in case you're interested).  My point is that we all see things a little differently based on our perspectives, our biases, our experiences, and whatever else has shaped us into the beings we are. 

So, when we're looking back at...let's say...a war, people will of course have different views as to who started it and why.  Only from the vantage point of time can there be any kind of merging of the views into what passes for truth--and history.

Think specifically of something like the famous "shot heard 'round the world."  There are all kinds of opinions about who shot and why.  Or what, exactly, caused the Civil War?  Once "history" settles on answers to questions like these, it may or may not be the truth, but it's the "lie" we've settled on. 

This same concept applies to whichever period in history you happen to be studying. Hope this helps get you started!

Why are you white wash this question with a poem about an elephant the student ask you a question I at less try to answer the student you did a pretty little all the way round it but real never answer the question. True you never lie about but come on spill the story some the kids why you call your self an EXPERT.

Did you see my answer the time I put into it and I not a teacher and I will not call my self an expert but I did a better job answer her question but why ask the student if she need a dance or some facts with links to back them up oh I sorry you made a poem comparison and a lovely one at that yes very nice poem.

@#$%^&%%$*$(#*$$^#&@(@ poem get my meaning? I think the kids did.

jackwidow's profile pic

Posted on

For a long time, we viewed Columbus as a hero and saw Missions as quaint. The Oregon Trail was an adventure. Although these are not lies, specifically, they were perpetrated by history books and bedtime stories because they were romantic and simple.

What is a liar? A person who has lied or who lies repeatedly. Am I right? That a yes or no answer. What is being about Columbus today in all good school books? Columbus found American. What about the Vikings or the Chinese finding it first or should we ask the American Indians who really found American?

So I am saying Columbus found nothing but money no he stole that so he found nothing I was right the first time. A lie is a lie or liar and your cover up that liar by say it's a bedtime stories because they were romantic more lies on top of lies. When will you stop and look at your self you said Columbus did not find American FACT is fact so tell the kids the truth then. Do you really think the kids don't see that you lied to cover up another lie?

jackwidow's profile pic

Posted on

part 4

I like you to don't trust those so called Experts, Educators, go look for you self researching begs the question. How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go?

http://www.whatthebleep.com/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_the_Bleep_Do_We_Know!%3F

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT50SV3W5K0

Just so we clear I never said I was an expert or that I am right about any I said but ever thing I did tell you can from some else and I do feel that most of what I said to be at less half right but this all right for me and me a lone. If you do your research right and dig until you can dig no more and your almost half right to make it yours you need to dig some more. That what the rabbit dose so should you. DIG DIG DIG and you will see the truth or the ACCURACY.

Showing 1–15 of 21

We’ve answered 324,149 questions. We can answer yours, too.

Ask a question