Presentism (literary and historical analysis) From Wikipedia, the free
encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Presentism is a mode of historical analysis in which present-day ideas and
perspectives are anachronistically introduced into depictions or
interpretations of the past. Some modern historians seek to avoid presentism
in their work because they believe it creates a distorted understanding of
their subject matter.
The Oxford English Dictionary gives the first citation for presentism in its
historiographical sense from 1916, and the word may have been in use in this
meaning as early as the 1870s. Historian David Hackett Fischer identifies
presentism as a logical fallacy also known as the "fallacy of nunc pro
tunc". He has written that the "classic example" of presentism was the
so-called "Whig history", in which certain eighteenth- and
nineteenth-century British historians wrote history in a way that used the
past to validate their own political beliefs. This interpretation was
presentist because it did not depict the past in objective historical
context, but instead viewed history only through the lens of contemporary
Whig beliefs. In this kind of approach, which emphasizes the relevance of
history to the present, things which do not seem relevant receive little
attention, resulting in a misleading portrayal of the past. "Whig history"
or "whiggishness" are often used as synonyms for presentism, particularly
when the historical depiction in question is teleological or triumphalist.
Have any of you teachers thought about going back to colleges and
universities and getting some more degrees in education?
John Philip Adams
Texas
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion of research and writing about Virginia history
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anne Pemberton
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2008 7:41 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: History as TRUTH
James,
Not sure if it is mentioned in 1491, but in the earlier book, "The Invasion
of America" by Francis Jennings, it is mentioned that archeologists have
found evidence that the Chinese visited the west coast of South and perhaps
Central America. There are suggestions that they ventured as far north as
San Francisco.
Columbus was a map-maker who wanted to get very rich by discovering the
shortest route to the Spice Islands for whatever country would finance his
adventure.
Bear in mind that those who were going west to fish the various banks of
North America were taking on the same perils in just as small, or smaller,
or craft than Columbus did. It's a matter of whether one is a seafaring man
or not.
If Columbus was such a "worthy man of his times" why was his governorship of
an island withdrawn for unsavory practices with the Natives?
It not a matter of presentism, its a matter of debunking childhood myths.
Anne
Anne Pemberton
[log in to unmask]
http://www.erols.com/apembert
http://www.educationalsynthesis.org
______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
|
