[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 32 KB, 500x500, iwo-jima-snapshot2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6621210 No.6621210 [Reply] [Original]

Unfortunately we don't have a history board, so I figured I'd make a thread here. Do you consider history a science? What is your favorite historical period?

>> No.6621213

Netherlands #1 country get fucked 4ners

>> No.6621214

>>6621213
pls no bully

>> No.6621215

>>6621214
Yo I'mma bully you so good.

>> No.6621216
File: 1.31 MB, 301x250, 1377199769310.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6621216

>>6621210
here comes the shitstorm

>> No.6621217

A combination of humanities and social sciences.

>> No.6621218

>>6621215
>>6621214
>>6621213
This is such a great thread.

>> No.6621219

>>6621210
Where did Napoleon get the influences from when he made the Code Napoleon?

>> No.6621220

>>6621210
>Do you consider history a science?

Yes, it uses different methods, so people would spurge out.

Anyway, I love Classical and Pre-Classical Greece. I'm planning on learning more about the Early Roman Republic (before the Punic Wars), as it's one of those periods people often ignore.

>> No.6621228

>>6621220
> I'm planning on learning more about the Early Roman Republic (before the Punic Wars)
Do NOT trust Livy

>> No.6621231

>>6621228
Do not trust Livia either, amirite?

>> No.6621235

>>6621231
Lel, too right

>> No.6621237

>>6621210
>What is your favorite historical period?
the enlightenment.

everyone today is dumb as fuck, yet they own and use the brainchild of the most brillant scientists whom have walked the earth.

I'd like to live in a time when stupid people used stupid tools, and only smart people are worthy to use the new technologies.

>> No.6621241

>>6621237
>average /sci/ poster

Well /int/ there's your answer

>> No.6621244

I was recently interested in a particular historical event, though I am not usually interested in history. This event seemed far-fetched to me, so I was wondering how they knew it happened. So I started tracing back citations in papers that talked about it.

Historians will write an entire paragraph, or even two, then put in a single reference at the end. What part of their paragraph are they referencing? Beats me. Then look at the reference itself... sometimes it's an entire book! So you have to wade through all of that to find any information on the event and an original source. Much of the time there is nothing there, so it's a complete dead end. Much of the time it's just contemporary historians referencing each other. No way to trace back to original or near-primary sources.

It was very frustrating and left me with a very poor impression of history as a science.

Want to know how I eventually found primary source material? Freakin' Google, and its scanning of reproductions of 17th century texts.

>> No.6621245

>>6621244
What was the event?

>> No.6621248

>>6621237
Thanks for letting me know why everyone hates /sci/, anon.

>> No.6621273

>>6621244
Well those historians you've read surely skipped a class or two, it seems

>> No.6621294

AYYY LMAO

>> No.6621321

>>6621237
If you are interested in that Period go to the British Museum. They have a great exhibit which includes all of the instruments everyone made and letters and books on the philosophy that lead to the enlightenment. The audio tour is great. It also has free admission.

I have always been interested in the enlightenment then the following disillusionment after World War One.

I am always trying to fill the gaps in my historical knollege. Currently I don't know anything about the history of the Balkans and am going to read about that this summer.

>> No.6621325

>>6621294
>>>/tumblr/
You were never welcome on /int/.

>> No.6621326

>>6621325
this is /sci/ m8

>> No.6621332
File: 31 KB, 457x360, appleiipd2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6621332

>>6621210
I'll probably catch flak for this but the amount of history even starting from the 1950's and working forwards is astounding. Maybe the 50's-mid 90's are the most fascinating to me.

I'm actually a rising college freshman and I'm considering a history major but I'm also pretty interested in political science. I'm sure there's a way to combine the two.

>> No.6621333

>>6621237
>everyone today is dumb as fuck
The spirit of the enlightenment era perhaps. If you're arguing people today is less informed overall than people of the enlightenment you're mistaken.
It's more the opposite, because so many people are partially enlightened today almost everyone can read and write,
therefore the quality of the written word is not just that of the thinking from people of higher education.

>> No.6621335

>>6621210
>Unfortunately we don't have a history board

Maybe this is ultimately a good thing since I can't see /pol/ leaving that one alone

>> No.6621363

History is written by the winners and rulers
>history is a lie

>> No.6621379

>>6621363
That's deep

>> No.6621380

>>6621210
/his/ belongs on /tg/.

>> No.6621386

>>6621380

The last week there was someone spamming in a /tg/ Byzantine related thread, that historic threads belonged to /int/.

>> No.6621388

>>6621386
what if it was a thread about the history of science

>> No.6621390

>>6621388

This one already is about the Science of the History.

>> No.6621391

>>6621380
What does history have to do with games?

>> No.6621414

>>6621363
Modern world history courses strives to fix this by taking a non eurocentric view. The problem you describe is real, but it's not like propaganda can't be disproved.
Valuing your sources and their bias isn't a problem just limited to world history, it's very much a factor in everyday life and even social interactions.

>> No.6621421

Wow. /pol/ is better at discussing history than /sci/.

Thanks for the little science experiment, /sci/. :^)

With love,
/int/

>> No.6621430

>>6621421
/pol/ is generally more well-read, /sci/ has little knowledge outside their narrow field of science

>> No.6621438

>>6621391
/tg/ does an absurd amount of history research as part of building game settings. They regularly express regret that there's no /his/ board, and have fairly in-depth historical discussion with relative frequency.

>> No.6621452

>>6621210
/int/ is a history board

>> No.6621460

>>6621210
>What is your favorite historical period?
that is not a science question. if you had provided a distinct historical question, you would have got a nice explanation and a debate. but you just wanted to dick around.

>> No.6621463

>>6621430
>/sci/ has little knowledge outside their narrow field of science

This is very true, this board is very bright and can answer difficult questions but it's also very blind to anything outside of the mechanics it studies.
It's almost like there is a intentional compartmentualization happening between the humanistic and technical side of things in the educational system.
Keeping the cream of the intelligencia apolitical is obv very functional if you have a military industrial complex to run, but the way it works in
having scientifically minded people, especially the US crowd, self-segrating from less rigouros but highly important fields of inquiry is a very sad thing to watch.

>> No.6621480

>>6621430
>/pol/ is generally more well-read
On what? Conspiracy bullshit?

>> No.6621504

As long as historians ask good questions and answer them using primary sources or good secondary sources it could be considered a science. Not as rigorous as any of the hard sciences, but kept free of the bullshit going on in sociology. Unfortunately, many historians go the bullshit way instead nowadays. At my faculty, I've read dissertations that had no primary sources at all and instead called themselves "theoretical". As if theoretical history is at all possible. We need more practical historians who are willing to go through the annoyances of finding and reading primary sources, not retards spouting postmodernist-tier bullshit.

>> No.6621505

>>6621363
>History is written by the literate
FTFY

>> No.6621521

>>6621504

Completely wrong.

Science is about observable, testable, repeatable, and falsifiable phenomena. Does water boil at 95 degrees on tall mountains? We can test that.

History is about unobservable, untestable, unrepeatable and unfalsifiable phenomena. Did Hitler kill himself by shooting, or poison, or both? There's no way to observe it, no way to test it, certainly no way to repeat it, and no way to falsify it now.

History is not science. History is a collection of unreliable anecdotes.

>> No.6621536

>>6621521
What you said depends on the question asked by the historian. Do we have sources that say how Hitler killed himself? If we do, can we find more than one source that confirm that he killed himself in that way? That is a repeated observation. It's also completely possible for historians to falsify phenomena, and it has happened several times. Ways that it can happen are that previous sources have been showed to be unreliable or even fabrications.

Though, historians can not do experiments in the way that the natural sciences do, of courses. Variables can not be controlled, like seeing how WW2 would have played out if Hitler wasn't in power or something similar. So I'll have to give you that.

>> No.6621579

>>6621521

I'm not a usual lurker on /sci/, so when you refer to primary sources, you mean original documents, correct? For instance, if an individual wanted to write a book on James Madisons authorship of the Constitution, a primary source would be correspondence written by Madison himself to somebody concerning the drafting of the document, as well as documents such as The Federalist Papers and the Constitution itself, even?

>> No.6621590
File: 136 KB, 546x700, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
6621590

>>6621430
>/pol/ is generally more well-read
I had a giggle...

>> No.6621598

>>6621579
Yeah, you have the right idea.

>> No.6621608

>>6621210
> Do you consider history a science?
> a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.
no
> What is your favorite historical period?
industrial revolution