In his 1972 article On the Writing and Rewriting of History, L.O. Mink presents some of the intuitive paradoxical issues related to historical knowledge. The first intuitive paradox presented in his work, which I will henceforth refer to as the paradox of historical accessibility (PHA), deals with the difficulty of knowing. Through effective examples, Mink illustrates the difficulty and even impossibility of gaining a complete and accurate knowledge of the actual past. In On the Writing and Rewriting of History, Mink presents the following argument in which he refers to Caesar to support his claims of historical accessibility: He [Caesar] did cross the Rubicon, and we know that he did, but there are many details about that action- how was he dressed? Was he shaved or unshaved? Did he hesitate and look around before the die was cast?- which we don’t know. But we don’t doubt that the event was detailed and determinate in innumerable such ways. Here, Mink presents a valid point. There are many minute details progressing ad infinitum, the knowledge of which is essentially impossible at present and any claim to this knowledge would likely be unfounded and dubious. Spatial distance and temporal distance are obviously different forms of measurement, which indicates the differing nature and characteristics of the two ideas. Though spatial is physical in nature while temporal is abstract, temporal distance presents a more formidable barrier to historical investigation since modern modes of transportation grant us an almost unlimited access to any geographic location on earth. It would be hyperbolic to compare the decay of public roadways to the decay of historical evidence as the decay or destruction of original historical documents, f... ... middle of paper ... ...nts are purely intellectual constructions (italics added), the situation is exactly the same in this respect as the situation in regard to a dispute about the nature of an object… Nowell-Smith wishes to distinguish between an interpretation and an “intellectual construction”. Historical observation is not the same as looking. Strength of historical facts The second intuitive paradox Mink presents deals with the nature of historical facts. Mink suggests that historical facts differ from facts in hard sciences because historical facts though often as uncontroversial as they are historical facts are nonetheless “complex, abstract, and inferential”. This understanding of historical facts implies that historians can never know true hard-facts about a historical event regardless of methodology since the temporal distance of the past leaves it partially inaccessible.
Procopius of Caesarea was a scholar and contemporary historian from Palaestina, who wrote about the reign of the Eastern Roman Emperor Justinian during the time of 527-560 AD . One of the most interesting and important writing by Procopius is Anecdota or better known as “Secret History”. The Secret History was written around 550 AD and it includes Procopius’s true thoughts and criticisms of Justinian as a person and as an emperor.
The Web. The Web. 25 Nov. 2013. http://school.eb.com/levels/high/article/273442>. The "Julius Caesar."
Plutarch presented history through biographical stories of the people that were important and influential during the time period he wished to address. However, after having read some of his work, one realizes that Plutarch inserts his own personal opinion and views of the people at hand into the factual documentation of their lives. For example, in The Life of Crassus, Plutarch expresses a general dislike and negative view of the man, but in The Life of Caesar he portrays the life through a lens of praise. It also seems that he uses his opinions of the people that he writes about to subtly extend moral lessons to the reader. What follows is a further isolation of Plutarch's opinions and lessons from within The Lives of Crassus and Caesar.
Crossing the Rubicon was the first act of war against Pompey. By crossing the Rubicon, Caesar no longer had an option but to attack Rome. Caesar tried to collect a fleet quickly to cross the sea and beat Pompey before he was able to strengthen his ships (Civil Wars by Julius Caesar). Once Caesar crossed the Rubicon, the Civil War officially started, leaving Caesar with no option but to continue fighting against Pompey and attacking Rome. However, the war was not only about who would remain in power, but also how the state would be ran, and everything about its future. The soldiers and citizens were not only continuing to fight because Caesar crossed the Rubicon, but also to support the leader whose political views were similar to there’s. Thus, creating an army of troops and supporters behind each leader, forcing them to continue
I chose Akbar the Mughal Emperor, Procopius, and Thomas Aquinas as my three to attend a dinner party. I knew I wanted to write about knowledge. Originally, I wanted to include the Queen of Sheba as a member of the dinner party, but I questioned whether I would be able to include enough about this character. My first choice was Thomas Aquinas, because he focused on reason as a way to acquire knowledge. This means that knowledge is internal for him. One section in the Summa Theologica is the “Gift of Knowledge”. I also wanted to play with Aquinas’ writing style. I chose Akbar because he invited so many diverse scholars to speak about a wide array of topics. I use his character to discuss the ways we use knowledge. My final choice was Procopius. I chose Procopius instead of the Queen of Sheba, so I could bring up how we present our knowledge and how our knowledge evolves. Procopius wrote The Secret History and the History of the Wars. These works have alternate views of Justinian, that evolved with events during that time period. My goal is to find a conclusion from these about the value of knowledge, how knowledge is used, and how knowledge is presented.
It is thought that Meno's paradox is of critical importance both within Plato's thought and within the whole history of ideas. It's major importance is that for the first time on record, the possibility of achieving knowledge from the mind's own resources rather than from experience is articulated, demonstrated and seen as raising important philosophical questions.
For centuries, views of the world and its inhabitants have been expressed through various ways of art or philosophy. These views can often be related to the seeking of truth to the creation of life, politics, or the problems of the world from before, now, and after. Accordingly, it is by paintings, books, or music, that words or images have an abundant effect on people. Society indicates that knowledge is power, so then why are we sometimes burdened with the errors of generations before? The quote, “writing in English is the most ingenious torture ever devised for sins committed in previous lives. The English reading public explains the reason why,” by James Joyce; points out that any novelist, historian, or author writing about our previous failures as humans in history affects any reader in a way that brings up painful memories and leaves the reader with past knowledge. To be honest, I had to grab a chair and think for what seemed like hours before I could actually comprehend what the quote was saying. I thought to myself, “How can writing about the past bring pain to the reader? I understood how writing can bring knowledge to a person, but how can it affect anything in the present?” As Vladimir Nabokov said, “In reading, one should notice and fondle details.” So, I opened up my mind and started to analyze the quote. Then, suddenly it clicked! In The Prince by Niccolò Machiavelli, Machiavelli has a similar style to this quote in which he explains that any prince should not select anything else for study but the art of war. He declares through studying the histories of the art of war, “A prince will learn of many illustrious men’s causes for victory or defeat; therefore, avoiding the latter and imitating the former.”(Machiavell...
Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) was one of the most outstanding leaders in history. He was the first ruler of the Romano-Hellenic civilization and achieved his goals with great success throughout his life of 56 years. He was assassinated by the conspirators, who accused him for practicing tyranny. This essay will discuss whether it was right for the conspirators to murder Caesar and what its consequences were.
In the Meno, Plato addresses the question of virtue, what it is, how to obtain and if virtue can be taught. Meno came to conclusion after a long discussion with Socrates that it is impossible to know what virtue is. The Meno’x paradox states, “if one knows what virtue is, he does not need to search for it. However, if one does not know what virtue is, how can he search for it? He may not know he has it even when he gets it.” Seeing how hopeless Meno is, Socrates propose the theory of recollection as a way to obtain virtue. This paper will argue against this theory.
Therefore, it’s difficult to start a conversation between geologists, archaeologists and historians. It’s vital to narrow the research prospects in these fields but also I think there needs to be more scientific discourse between different fields that affect each other in one way or another. The human historical paradigm is grounded in the research of archaeology. However, Hancock debates that the field of geology has more to teach humans about our history than we think. He debates that around 15,000 to 8,000 BC, during the last ice age, an unprecedented world-wide cataclysm was overlooked that led to the extinction of countless species, including the megafauna (Hancock
Breisach, Ernst. Historiography; Ancient, Medieval, and Modern. 3rd. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 2007.
Hermeneutic philosopher Wilhelm Dilthey thought that by examining history, we would be better able to understand people from the past. One objection could be that his theory implies that by knowing the external events at play in a person’s life, one would be able to understand that person and what they have written. I argue that Dilthey’s account works as long as one thinks of understanding as “seeing where one is coming from” rather than as “claiming to know how one feels.”
background of Julius Caesar by mentioning how Julius Caesar used historic facts from “Brutus, Caesar, and Antony. (333)” This book provides a detailed summary of Julius Caesar and a list of characters. It also gives dates for when the play was first performed and printed. This source tal...
“It was a new discovery to find that these stories were, after all, about our own lives, were not distant, that there was no past or future that all time is now-time, centred in the being.” (Pp39.)