[Humanist] 23.567 why history

Humanist Discussion Group willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Thu Jan 14 07:14:42 CET 2010


                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 23, No. 567.
         Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
                       www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org



        Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 11:09:48 -0500
        From: "Geoffrey C. Bowker" <gbowker at pitt.edu>
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 23.563 why history


Hi folks,

I like this one from Braudel - it's pretty much as true today as it was 
64 years ago:

"Surely history need not simply be condemned to the study of well-walled 
gardens?  If it is, will it not fail in one of its present tasks, of 
responding to the agonizing problems of the hour and of keeping in touch 
with the human sciences, which are at once so young and so 
imperialistic?  Can there be any humanism at the present time, in 1946, 
without an ambitious history, conscious of its duties and its great 
powers?  'It is the fear of History, of history on the grand scale, 
which has killed History,' wrote Edmond Faral in 1942.  May it be 
reborn!"  pp. 4-5 of _On History_ by Fernand Braudel

take care,

geof

Humanist Discussion Group wrote:
>                  Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 23, No. 563.
>          Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
>                        www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
>                 Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org
>
>   [1]   From:    James Rovira <jamesrovira at gmail.com>                       (9)
>         Subject: Re: [Humanist] 23.560 why history
>
>   [2]   From:    John Lavagnino <John.Lavagnino at kcl.ac.uk>                 (13)
>         Subject: Re: Why history?
>
>
> --[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
>         Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 09:28:14 -0500
>         From: James Rovira <jamesrovira at gmail.com>
>         Subject: Re: [Humanist] 23.560 why history
>         In-Reply-To: <20100112063256.E2C6524C14 at woodward.joyent.us>
>
>
> >From Kierkegaard's Concluding Unscientific Postscript:
>
> "The historian seeks to reach the greatest possible certainty, and the
> historian is not in any contradiction, because he is not in passion; at most
> he has the research scholar's objective passion.  As a research scholar, he
> belongs to a major endeavor from generation to generation; it is at all
> times objectively and scientifically important for him to come as close to
> certainty as possible, but it is not subjectively important to him." (p.
> 575, Hongs' translation, 1992)
>
> Jim R
>
>
>
> --[2]------------------------------------------------------------------------
>         Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:09:34 +0000
>         From: John Lavagnino <John.Lavagnino at kcl.ac.uk>
>         Subject: Re: Why history?
>         In-Reply-To: <20100112063256.E2C6524C14 at woodward.joyent.us>
>
> Carl Becker's "Everyman His Own Historian" is still worth reading: with 
> its clever strategy of talking about how everybody is a historian:
>
> http://www.historians.org/info/AHA_history/clbecker.htm
>
> John
>
>   

--Boundary_(ID_2OwyGyyRbT4o6adlmIBs7Q)
Content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html;charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi folks,<br>
<br>
I like this one from Braudel - it's pretty much as true today as it was
64 years ago: <br>
<br>
<p class="MsoNormal"
 style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; line-height: normal; page-break-after: avoid;"><span
 style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;;">"Surely
history need not simply be condemned to the study of well-walled
gardens?<span style="">  </span>If it is, will it not fail in one of
its
present tasks, of responding to the agonizing problems of the hour and
of
keeping in touch with the human sciences, which are at once so young
and so
imperialistic?<span style="">  </span>Can there be any humanism
at the present time, in 1946, without an ambitious history, conscious
of its
duties and its great powers?<span style="">  </span>'It is
the fear of History, of history on the grand scale, which has killed
History,' wrote Edmond Faral in 1942.<span style=""> 
</span>May it be reborn!"<span style="">  </span>pp. 4-5
of <u>On History</u> by Fernand Braudel<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<br>
<br>
take care,<br>
<br>
geof<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Humanist Discussion Group wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:20100113060916.1E1304576D at woodward.joyent.us"
 type="cite">
  <pre wrap="">                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 23, No. 563.
         Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
                       <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist">www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist</a>
                Submit to: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org">humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org</a>

  [1]   From:    James Rovira <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jamesrovira at gmail.com">&lt;jamesrovira at gmail.com&gt;</a>                       (9)
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 23.560 why history

  [2]   From:    John Lavagnino <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:John.Lavagnino at kcl.ac.uk">&lt;John.Lavagnino at kcl.ac.uk&gt;</a>                 (13)
        Subject: Re: Why history?

--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 09:28:14 -0500
        From: James Rovira <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:jamesrovira at gmail.com">&lt;jamesrovira at gmail.com&gt;</a>
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 23.560 why history
        In-Reply-To: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:20100112063256.E2C6524C14 at woodward.joyent.us">&lt;20100112063256.E2C6524C14 at woodward.joyent.us&gt;</a>

&gt;From Kierkegaard's Concluding Unscientific Postscript:

"The historian seeks to reach the greatest possible certainty, and the
historian is not in any contradiction, because he is not in passion; at most
he has the research scholar's objective passion.  As a research scholar, he
belongs to a major endeavor from generation to generation; it is at all
times objectively and scientifically important for him to come as close to
certainty as possible, but it is not subjectively important to him." (p.
575, Hongs' translation, 1992)

Jim R

--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:09:34 +0000
        From: John Lavagnino <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:John.Lavagnino at kcl.ac.uk">&lt;John.Lavagnino at kcl.ac.uk&gt;</a>
        Subject: Re: Why history?
        In-Reply-To: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:20100112063256.E2C6524C14 at woodward.joyent.us">&lt;20100112063256.E2C6524C14 at woodward.joyent.us&gt;</a>

Carl Becker's "Everyman His Own Historian" is still worth reading: with 
its clever strategy of talking about how everybody is a historian:

<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.historians.org/info/AHA_history/clbecker.htm">http://www.historians.org/info/AHA_history/clbecker.htm</a>

John

  </pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>

--Boundary_(ID_2OwyGyyRbT4o6adlmIBs7Q)--






More information about the Humanist mailing list