Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang
hr 1999 ook, Decolonizing Methodologies,InTuhiwai Smith xplains how manyLindathat valu oral ways of approahing thsystmshav n “rlassifid as oral traditionsworldthan historis”. This lassifiation suggstsrathrth storis and aounts whih ar anthatpart of th fari of ths Indignousssntialand ar mddd in th land,ommunitiswithin popl’s nams and gnalogiswovnxprssd through art and raft, do notanda valid mthod of aquiring oronstitutknowldg.transmittinghistories, along with generally labelledOralartefacts”, have played an“material-culturalrole in carrying and communicating theimportantsystems of many peoples around theknowledgeboth for themselves and outsiders. For thisworld,the modern practice of taking and storingreason,artefacts in museums in the large cities ofsuchindustrialized nations has significantadvancedfor access to knowledge and ethics—implicationsit is historical, religious or artistic. This iswhetherfor example, someone’s battle shield ends uphow,the prehistoric or artistic exhibit of a museum,inwhen it belongs to a people or cultureevenis very much in the present. What are thethatof this practice, for history as well asimplicationsareas of knowledge? To what extent shouldotherreturn these artefacts to their people, even ifwemeans dismantling museums’ collections?thatexplore this issue in more depth inWe10, II.4.Chapterin th futur may wll hav a vryHistoriansprolm, aus prsnt-day ulturdiffrntargumnt within history is that its mthods,Onqustions, ar prnnial: thy apply toandlif always and forvr. Lt’s pursu thishumanto s whr it lads.idayou ar a historian in 2120, trying toImaginth narrativ of human lif in 2020.ronstrut1. What rords do you hav of 2020?Who mad ths rords, why, and in2.form?whatWhat, and who, might missing from3.rords?thsHow do th answrs to qustions 1–34.your intrprtation of th rord,afftthe historian before you begin to study theStudyThe facts … are like sh on the shmonger’sfacts.The historian collects them, takes them homeslab.cooks and serves them.andontinu with th mtaphor of tras ofLt’spast floating through tim, and assum nowthw hav a historian willing and al tothatthm. Th qustion for us is whthrgrasphistorian an “s” ths tras as thyourojtiv rmnants of th past—orar—asth historian nssarily has a sujtivwhthrTh kn osrvr will ralizintrprtation.thr is anothr, mor fundamntal qustion:thatan w disrn twn sujtiv andhowintrprtations of th knowal past?ojtivdo w rogniz ojtivity and sujtivityHowIII. Methods and toolsIII. Methods and toolsFor reflectionInterpreting the historical recordMaking connectionsArt, museums and ethicsand your narrativ of human lif in 2020?III.2 The historian’s role(Carr 1961)lavs suh a vast matrial and digital footprint.whn w s thm?263
III. Methods and toolshistorian, journalist and diplomat E.H.Thngagd with this sujt intnsly inCarrwhat w all “historial fats”, asqustiondy his grat-granddaughtr, Hlnxplaindan hangd or manipulatd to nfit thos rlaying thm, somthing w ar autly“Fatsof today. During Carr’s liftim, Stalin’s rgim dstroyd doumnts, altrd vidnawardistortd history ... It is th ontinud misrprsntation and misus of fat, dlirat orandthat Carr intrrogats in What is History? H nourags any studnt of history toaidntal,disrning: “What is a historial fat? This is a ruial qustion into whih w must look amor losly.” (Carr 2019)littlof E.H. Carr’s ky points was that, ausOnth vast amount of information availal toofth fats, thy invitaly nd up hoosingof“fats” to mak us of.whihis a historial fat? … Aording to th ommonsns viw, thr ar rtain asi fats“Whatar th sam for all historians and whih form, so to spak, th akon of history—whihfat, for xampl, that th Battl of Hastings was fought in 1066. But this viw alls forthosrvations. In th first pla, it is not with fats lik ths that th historian is primarilytwoIt is no dout important to know that th grat attl was fought in 1066 and notonrnd.or 1067 … . Th historian must not gt ths things wrong. But whn points of this kind1065raisd, I am rmindd of Housman’s rmark that ‘auray is a duty, not a virtu’. To praisarhistorian for his auray is lik praising an arhitt for using wll-sasond timr. … It isanssary ondition of his work, ut not his ssntial funtion. … It usd to said that fatsafor thmslvs. This is, of ours, untru. Th fats spak only whn th historian alls onspakit is h who dids to whih fats to giv th floor, and in what ordr or ontxt. … Ththm:rason why w ar intrstd to know that th attl was fought at Hastings in 1066 is thatonlyrgard it as a major historial vnt. It is th historian who has didd for his ownhistoriansthat Casar’s rossing of that ptty stram, th Ruion, is a fat of history, whrasrasonsrossings of th Ruion y millions of othr popl for or sin intrsts noody atth… Th historian is nssarily sltiv. Th lif in a hard or of historial fats xistingall.and indpndntly of th historian is a prpostrous fallay, ut on whih it is vryojtivlyto radiat.” (Carr 1990)hardCarr’s viw, it was vry lar: th historianInfor th past aus th past annotspaksfor itslf. Carr thus advisd his studntsspakstudy th historian for studying thirtoTh impliation for historial knowldgfats.to xamin th rol of th intrprtr andwasmight influn thm. Carr was onlywhatamong many that grappld with thsonCollingwood was a pionr of sujtivR.G.arguing a fw dads for Carrhistoriism,historians “ronstrut” history asdthata omination of th availal rord andonimagination of th thought prosss ofanin th past. Considr what his all topoplmans for nutrality, authntiityimaginationtruth in history.and9Box 9.4: Does the past speak for itself?his influntial 1961 ook What is History? CarrCarr (introdud in II.1).historians, and thir sujtiv intrprtationqustions of truth and ojtivity in history.264
- Page 219 and 220: I. Scopeidea of describing society
- Page 221 and 222: who had been placed at the ‘lower
- Page 223 and 224: explore perspectives on the existen
- Page 225 and 226: II. Perspectivesallegations of scie
- Page 227 and 228: we look at the simplifications that
- Page 229 and 230: II. PerspectivesIII. Methods and to
- Page 231 and 232: III. Methods and toolslack of diver
- Page 233 and 234: III. Methods and toolssensitivity
- Page 235 and 236: III. Methods and toolsMargaret Mead
- Page 237 and 238: III. Methods and toolstheir presenc
- Page 239 and 240: III. Methods and toolstold Mahbub,
- Page 241 and 242: III. Methods and toolsY. Thinley, a
- Page 243 and 244: III. Methods and toolsis the scope
- Page 245 and 246: III. Methods and toolssignificant c
- Page 247 and 248: III. Methods and toolsIV. Ethics7 d
- Page 249 and 250: IV. Ethicschange … brings togethe
- Page 251 and 252: last example brings together ideas
- Page 253 and 254: to show it how it was.” This was
- Page 255 and 256: I. Scope7 raises the question of wh
- Page 257 and 258: I. Scopeis more than a matter of po
- Page 259 and 260: II. Perspectivesqustion w xplord in
- Page 261 and 262: was not alon in rflting dply aoutCa
- Page 263 and 264: II. Perspectiveshistorial ontxt, ut
- Page 265 and 266: of Yugoslavia and th Sovit Union;ra
- Page 267 and 268: II. Perspectivesor indpndnt shools
- Page 269: III. Methods and toolswith an intrs
- Page 273 and 274: III. Methods and toolsinstad of oth
- Page 275 and 276: III. Methods and toolsmonks and lrg
- Page 277 and 278: III. Methods and toolsh had n ordrd
- Page 279 and 280: III. Methods and toolswould naiv,
- Page 281 and 282: IV. Ethicsin Chaptr 5. Grgory Young
- Page 283 and 284: IV. Ethicsis filld with xtraordinar
- Page 285 and 286: 10chapter explores the human encoun
- Page 287 and 288: I. Scopethe historical development
- Page 289 and 290: I. Scopehas the status of women art
- Page 291 and 292: I. ScopeTruth and knowledge in art:
- Page 293 and 294: I. Scopeterms: ElizabethSearchDesir
- Page 295 and 296: II. Perspectivesby Vermeer were rar
- Page 297 and 298: II. Perspectiveswas one thing van M
- Page 299 and 300: II. Perspectivesare found in the br
- Page 301 and 302: II. Perspectivesterms: CNN Business
- Page 303 and 304: II. Perspectivesof the time, to dra
- Page 305 and 306: II. Perspectivesthe last few hundre
- Page 307 and 308: II. Perspectivesafter that date, bu
- Page 309 and 310: II. Perspectiveshave been examples
- Page 311 and 312: II. PerspectivesIII. Methods and to
- Page 313 and 314: III. Methods and tools1. Is having
- Page 315 and 316: III. Methods and toolsThe rst thing
- Page 317 and 318: III. Methods and toolscan be deeply
- Page 319 and 320: IV. Ethicsmay notice that many know
III. Methods and tools
historian, journalist and diplomat E.H.
Th
ngagd with this sujt intnsly in
Carr
what w all “historial fats”, as
qustiond
y his grat-granddaughtr, Hln
xplaind
an hangd or manipulatd to nfit thos rlaying thm, somthing w ar autly
“Fats
of today. During Carr’s liftim, Stalin’s rgim dstroyd doumnts, altrd vidn
awar
distortd history ... It is th ontinud misrprsntation and misus of fat, dlirat or
and
that Carr intrrogats in What is History? H nourags any studnt of history to
aidntal,
disrning: “What is a historial fat? This is a ruial qustion into whih w must look a
mor losly.” (Carr 2019)
littl
of E.H. Carr’s ky points was that, aus
On
th vast amount of information availal to
of
th fats, thy invitaly nd up hoosing
of
“fats” to mak us of.
whih
is a historial fat? … Aording to th ommonsns viw, thr ar rtain asi fats
“What
ar th sam for all historians and whih form, so to spak, th akon of history—
whih
fat, for xampl, that th Battl of Hastings was fought in 1066. But this viw alls for
th
osrvations. In th first pla, it is not with fats lik ths that th historian is primarily
two
It is no dout important to know that th grat attl was fought in 1066 and not
onrnd.
or 1067 … . Th historian must not gt ths things wrong. But whn points of this kind
1065
raisd, I am rmindd of Housman’s rmark that ‘auray is a duty, not a virtu’. To prais
ar
historian for his auray is lik praising an arhitt for using wll-sasond timr. … It is
a
nssary ondition of his work, ut not his ssntial funtion. … It usd to said that fats
a
for thmslvs. This is, of ours, untru. Th fats spak only whn th historian alls on
spak
it is h who dids to whih fats to giv th floor, and in what ordr or ontxt. … Th
thm:
rason why w ar intrstd to know that th attl was fought at Hastings in 1066 is that
only
rgard it as a major historial vnt. It is th historian who has didd for his own
historians
that Casar’s rossing of that ptty stram, th Ruion, is a fat of history, whras
rasons
rossings of th Ruion y millions of othr popl for or sin intrsts noody at
th
… Th historian is nssarily sltiv. Th lif in a hard or of historial fats xisting
all.
and indpndntly of th historian is a prpostrous fallay, ut on whih it is vry
ojtivly
to radiat.” (Carr 1990)
hard
Carr’s viw, it was vry lar: th historian
In
for th past aus th past annot
spaks
for itslf. Carr thus advisd his studnts
spak
study th historian for studying thir
to
Th impliation for historial knowldg
fats.
to xamin th rol of th intrprtr and
was
might influn thm. Carr was only
what
among many that grappld with ths
on
Collingwood was a pionr of sujtiv
R.G.
arguing a fw dads for Carr
historiism,
historians “ronstrut” history asd
that
a omination of th availal rord and
on
imagination of th thought prosss of
an
in th past. Considr what his all to
popl
mans for nutrality, authntiity
imagination
truth in history.
and
9
Box 9.4: Does the past speak for itself?
his influntial 1961 ook What is History? Carr
Carr (introdud in II.1).
historians, and thir sujtiv intrprtation
qustions of truth and ojtivity in history.
264