The_Patriot
DP Veteran
- Joined
- May 28, 2010
- Messages
- 1,488
- Reaction score
- 206
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
This is an offshoot of the Columbus Day thread. What matters more to you; historical facts backed by documentation or historical fiction passed off as facts?
Doesn't it seem odd to you that some at this point in time are at all concerned with Columbus and his legacy (??) I mean, why not go back further and think how lovely the World would have been if ONLY those Frankish Knights hadn't halted the First Jihad at Tours(??) or if the Mongols had made it all the way to Paris, or if the Aztecs were still ripping out Human hearts and Caking the Temple walls with blood and enjoying a few select delicasies
In what regard?
Is this in regards to names, dates, and events? (X person went to Y and did Z at such and such a time frame).
Or are we talking about the interpretation of those events? (X event is historically important because ...). The reason I ask is that the second category is hard to pin down factually as it intermingles fact with opinion.
Well, that doesn't really answer the question I had. Here is why.
Are we talking about myself, where what I would like to know when picking up a scholar's book or article? I would like to see that author's true attempt to convey the truth of his narrative to the best of his or her ability.
Are we talking about a young school child? Do I want the young child to know that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson owned slaves, that much of Washington D.C. was built by the hands of slaves without due respect, that many Africans and African Americans fought in our wars proudly without receiving their due respect from their white peers, that the citizenry was not expected to be as politically involved as they are now, that certain Presidents didn't want certain groups of people to even be born? Or would I have them learn about Honest Abe, how George Washington couldn't tell a lie, that we live in a good country where freedom and liberty are deeply treasured?
Do we tell the good facts, the bad facts, or the historical fictions? I would like my child to start off with a positive, if not somewhat fictionalized beginning so I could steadily approach my child to see the complications of history and how we do not have to accept all that transpired, but that we also cannot entirely demonize it. When children are young they are easily manipulated, when they grow older, they have a disproportionate attraction to the ideal, then eventually, they are able to face the complications of reality. History challenges people at every turn in their lives, and we must be careful with how we challenge them.
The problem is that there is not enough time to tell everyone everything. We have to decide what is important.
Are you saying the historical fiction passed off as fact is important?
No. I am saying that we have to hit the highlights.
Yet, many of the historical fictions are passed off as highlights like the sheer ignorance of John Adam's or Andrew Jackson's presidency.
Ignorance is not the same thing as fiction.
False information is ignorance.
This would a case of a lack of information though. Which is ignorance, but its not a lie.
This is an offshoot of the Columbus Day thread. What matters more to you; historical facts backed by documentation or historical fiction passed off as facts?
Semantics so do you have anything to add of substance besides this semantics argument?
Its not semantics. A lack of information and false information are two very different things. False information is untruthful while a lack of information neither true nor untrue.
So you have nothing to add that is on topic. Thank you for replies.
I have plenty to add in pointing out the falseness of your idea that these two things are semantics. This distinction is important to help understand some of the meaning behind Fiddy's post.
A lie is the intent to deceive and by giving out false information ie historical fiction is an intent to deceive. Ignorance is a lack of knowledge which having false information is a lack of knowledge since it's not the truth. Got anything else to add on the semantics front or are you actually going to actually answer the question posed in the thread? You've had plenty of oppertunity to answer it and you haven't. Trust me, Fiddy can handle himself instead of you hijacking his position.
Personally I think we should tell the truth whenever possible as a general principal. However, you seem to have a very warped idea of what truth actually is. (and that is a word we are going to have to nail down if we ever want a fruitful discussion)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?