I'm not saying we ditch it, only that I don't understand why it's considered to be anything more than a (legitimate) hobby, and why it's a part of core curricula, rather than an elective subject. I'm willing to be convinced, but at the moment...

Really, none, unless you're planning on being a history professor. At least that's the conclusion I came to as a history major. I didn't become a history professor, so it's done me a lot of good.What good is studying/researching/doing history?
But...we repeat them, anyway.Pappa wrote:I think the standard reason to study history is to not repeat the mistakes of the past by repeating them.
Yeah, some of it is interesting. But a required subject? Why? Schools could use that classtime for something actually useful. I'll bet there's some history behind the mandatory inclusion of history as core curriculum.Plus, lots of people find history very interesting in its own right.
Bella Fortuna wrote:Really, none, unless you're planning on being a history professor. At least that's the conclusion I came to as a history major. I didn't become a history professor, so it's done me a lot of good.What good is studying/researching/doing history?
Wut? If the military actually applied the lessons of history, there wouldn't be any more warfare, would there?Gawdzilla wrote:
History isn't intended to make people smarter. It's intended to help people make smarter choices. It can't MAKE them chose to not do dumb things.FBM wrote:Wut? If the military actually applied the lessons of history, there wouldn't be any more warfare, would there?Gawdzilla wrote:
Surely the secondary skills you learn from studying history are useful in a much wider way... learning to search for sources of information, assess the quality and validity of that info and combine it with other sources of information??? They're really useful to anyone really.FBM wrote:But a required subject? Why? Schools could use that classtime for something actually useful. I'll bet there's some history behind the mandatory inclusion of history as core curriculum.
The study of History is about analysis of events. You take pieces of information and make a coherent whole out of them. I was very good at reconstructing accident scenes because I could take testimony, photographs, damage reports, and the traffic code and determine how an accident happened. (I was the only one to figure out how a four year old ran over his own head.)Pappa wrote:Surely the secondary skills you learn from studying history are useful in a much wider way... learning to search for sources of information, assess the quality and validity of that info and combine it with other sources of information??? They're really useful to anyone really.FBM wrote:But a required subject? Why? Schools could use that classtime for something actually useful. I'll bet there's some history behind the mandatory inclusion of history as core curriculum.
I'll never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line.Gawdzilla wrote:FBM, try this:
"One thing history teaches us in to never get involved in a land war in Asia."
Even people who DO know history fuck around and wind up repeating it, anyway. I'm not knocking it as a hobby or intellectual exercise, but why claim it's useful when it so far hasn't proven to be?Gawdzilla wrote:History isn't intended to make people smarter. It's intended to help people make smarter choices. It can't MAKE them chose to not do dumb things.FBM wrote:Wut? If the military actually applied the lessons of history, there wouldn't be any more warfare, would there?Gawdzilla wrote:
Santayana is spinning in his grave right now.
But you learn the same skills in science, English, etc...Pappa wrote:Surely the secondary skills you learn from studying history are useful in a much wider way... learning to search for sources of information, assess the quality and validity of that info and combine it with other sources of information??? They're really useful to anyone really.
My original major, which I had transferred schools to be a part of because it was very unusual and specific, was cancelled the semester I got thereFBM wrote:Bella Fortuna wrote:Really, none, unless you're planning on being a history professor. At least that's the conclusion I came to as a history major. I didn't become a history professor, so it's done me a lot of good.What good is studying/researching/doing history?
So why did you major in history in the first place? (If that's not a sensitive topic, that is...) Do you feel like a better person for knowing all that stuff? Wiser?
Another historical precedent.FBM wrote:I'll never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line.Gawdzilla wrote:FBM, try this:
"One thing history teaches us in to never get involved in a land war in Asia."![]()
Not everybody who studies history fails to learn from it. The military is said to "always be training to fight the last war." Without history they'd know nothing of the last war. And studying the events that transpired when they did that have lead us to try and avoid that silliness in the future.Even people who DO know history fuck around and wind up repeating it, anyway. I'm not knocking it as a hobby or intellectual exercise, but why claim it's useful when it so far hasn't proven to be?Gawdzilla wrote:History isn't intended to make people smarter. It's intended to help people make smarter choices. It can't MAKE them chose to not do dumb things.FBM wrote:Wut? If the military actually applied the lessons of history, there wouldn't be any more warfare, would there?Gawdzilla wrote:
Santayana is spinning in his grave right now.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest