Abel Questions Chapter 15

1. Why is history being rewritten constantly?
History is being rewritten constantly because is "always written wrong." Abel says that the past is a "steady process of imaginative reinterpretation and reconstruction; we want it to be meaningful to us in the present."

2. What factors influence the process by which the historian picks and chooses his/her "facts"? Please provide a specific example for each factor.
-our interests change:example-In 50 years, will will probably care less about Miley Cyrus's "scandalous" photos, than her impact on popular music.
-our conceptual apparatus changes: example-we now have access to confidential documents from the Soviet Union about the Cold War, which we did not have before the collapse.
-our view for basic historical segment changes:example-"Toynbee holds the most intelligent unit not to be the nation, but the 'society.'"
-the interests and idiosyncrasies of the historian change:example-after WWII, Hitler was a very popular subject of study. Today, it might be Obama.
-the audience for whom the historian writes changes:example-a change in political party rule:republicans vs. democrats->the majority of the house changes.

3. What is the "Baconian fallacy?"What would the Positivists think? Would Carr agree with Namier?
The "Baconian fallacy" is the idea that "all the historians have to do is collect the facts." The Positivits would completely agree with this view, and say that the facts speak for themselves. Carr would agree with Namier, because Naimer believes that historians have to "single-out and stress" the most important parts, like a painter, and not like a photographer, who can capture everything at once.

4. How does History differ from Geology?
History differs from Geology in that historians "attribute meaning to [the] data." Whereas the geologists focus more on the present aspects of the rock they are examining and how the past could have affected it to look as it does.

5. According to Abel: "The patterns to be found in past events are selected by the historian; like the hypothesis of the scientist, they may be suggested, but are neither imposed nor dictated, by "the facts (p. 166-7)." Based on your experience with the Cheques Lab, how far do you agree with this explanation of history?
Based on my experience with the Cheques Lab, I agree to a decent extent with this explanation of history. Sometimes in History, the historian has to be able to see patterns to establish them as relevant, but the patterns are not necessarily the most important or even actual patterns vs. coincidences.

6. In your opinion, "how will future historians so elect to describe what is going on now(p. 167)?"
In my opinion, future historians will focus on the biggest issues facing our society today. In the future, historians will elect to discuss whether or not the first black American president was a good president, they will discuss the state of the economy, as well as the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

7. What is historical pluralism?
Historical pluralism is the historical process made up of the enumerable components which don't "form a completely inter-related set...[Historiacl pluralism] denies that every event is related to every other event."

8. The list of events (or non-events) listed on p. 168 makes Abel ask the question: "Is there, then, no hard core or bed-rock of indisputable facts that the historian must recognize." Does it matter if there ever was a man named Trotsky?
I think that based on perception, there is no hard-core of indisputable fact; in history everything is disputable. There are generally accepted facts, such as the Holocaust happened. Yet there are people who don't believe that the Holocaust happened. It matters that the Holocaust happened, and that there was a man named Trotsky, so that humans can keep a generally accepted record of what happened. This way, we become better at preventing things like mass genocide of a people, or the establishment of a cruel dictatorship.

9. How is a historian like a physicist?
A historian is like a physicist in that they both go "beyond the evidence," select their facts and how to describe them.

10. What are the Five Frameworks or Hypotheses of History? Please provide an example from your HL or SL history class of each.
-I:Cyclical:Repetition is likely.-The Jewish-Arab fight. Both sides feel so strongly that there are only a limitd amount of solution to the problem, and history, like the 1929 Riots and the Hebron Massacre are likely to repeat themselves until the problem is solved.
-II:foundational:they isolate and stress certain factors.
-a) History of civilization depends on "climate, soil, and geography."-The majority of land in the Middle East is not particularly arable, so Arabs have a hard time cultivating certain types of plants, which are part of a huge trading industry. Also, the Middle East is geographically located farther away from a major ocean, and therefore their history of civilization may be said to be slowed in comparison to lands such as England and America, which are located on arable lands near major trading routes.
-b)Race is stressed by historians as ancient-Jews, who have been considered to be a race, have been suppressed for millennia. They were the ones who had to handle money in the MIddle Ages when that was considered "dirty," and their control over banks because of that, which caused discrimination against them in the modern world (1920s-WWII, specifically).
-c)Heredity ability is paramount in historical interpretations-In the the Middle East, Prince Faisal was expected to be a good leader of Syria, and help establish a independent Arab state, just as his father did with the McMahon-Hussein correspondence.
-d)Psychological factors are identified by many as the moving force in history.-Hitler's campaign against the Jews worked in part because the people of Germany were downtrodden by the Treaty of Versailles, and were in the psychological condition to blame a scapegoat for their troubles.
-e)The motive of History to be the appearance of superior individuals.-Winston Churchill, who talked about making allies with the Russians before the end of the war, has eventually come to be known as one of England's most accomplished Prime Ministers.
-III:Progress:change in the direction of human interests-In Germany, HItler believed he was making progress for the betterment of Germans, by extinguishing Jews, homosexuals, and those who were disabled.
-IV:Christian:History is a great drama of sin and redemption.-Part of the Lebanese National Pact is that Lebanon will be an independent Arab state with special ties to the west (They are Christian) and are therefore mostly peaceful and not enter alliance against any other Arab state.
-V:Organismic:all civilizations grow, from infancy to death.-The Nazi ideals, which grew from anti-Semitism and from infancy after WWI, and the treaty of Versailles, and blossomed into frull growth, hence WWII, have nearly reached the death stage, although Neo-Nazism still exists today.

11. Do you believe in Historical Inevitability?
I do not believe in Historical Inevitability because I do not believe that future is predictable because of some overall "plot." I believe that history is continuing series of events that are interconnected, and may help us prevent certain diasters and calamities in the future, but will not hepl us predict the future.

12. What does Abel mean when he says: "No crucial experiment can test the validity of a theory of history, any more than than it can the truth of a metaphysical theory (p. 174)."?
Abel means that there is no way to test a theory of history, because the future is unknown. you can uses a theory to predict what will happen, and then, only after it has happened, use those results from history to verify your theory insofar. However, there is always the chance that something will happen which completely contradicts your theory, and there is simply no way to prepare for that.

13. Abel writes: "Macaulay regards history as a branch of literature (p. 174)." How would Jill Lepore of Just the Facts, Ma'am respond? Please provide to specific quote from the article to justify your claim.
JIll Lepore would agree, for the same reason that Abel states: "the historian, like the novelist, tells a story: this is how things happened." She would agree by saying that the historian looks at the facts and interprets them to tell a general story of what happened, while the novleist looks at the facts and interprets them to tell a story about human nature.

14. How does the footnote at the bottom of page 175 relate to the Shaper from Grendel?
The footnote at the bottom of page 175 relates to the Shaper from Grendel, because the Shaper takes the commonly acknowledged history, and changes it so that is the most falttering and reflective view, which is what each culture/race mentioned in the footnote is doing.