you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 4 months ago (15 children)

They're of course going to give you the surface level, popular version of what happened. If you want to actually know the real story you need to talk to historians.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (14 children)

    No you need to talk to people who have been dead for hundreds of years, your entire argument is based on not trusting historians.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (13 children)

    Historians are the ones who break through the myths. Myths are what you're taught in school. In school they told you all about how the US founding fathers were heroic figures fighting for their freedom...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (12 children)

    Did you forget how you wanted to end that or...? 🤷‍♂️

    Regardless, if you don't think historians are writing history books, what do you think they're doing? And no, in school they taught me that the US founding fathers founded the US, pretty objective stuff. You know, names, dates, locations, etc. I'm fascinated to hear what else you think I was taught though, this is fun!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (11 children)

    Regardless, if you don't think historians are writing history books, what do you think they're doing?

    Researching it and writing papers for other historians.

    Do you think most historians write popular history books for non-historians?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (10 children)

    No, but I do think history books are by definition written by historians.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (9 children)

    So, you think anybody who writes a book about history is a historian? No wonder you are so lost.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (8 children)

    No, I think anyone who writes a book of historical facts (hence the name "history book") based on research is a historian. And if I were lost, that'd fall under cartography, not history. See, cartography is the study of making maps. Maps are to cartographers as history books are to historians. Make sense?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (7 children)

    So, writing a book makes you a historian. It's not studying history?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (6 children)

    Damn, selective reading is a tough diagnosis. Is there a pattern, like you only understand every other word or something, or is it just completely random?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (5 children)

    Are you dodging the question? What makes someone a historian? Is anybody who writes a book on history automatically an authority on history?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (4 children)

    Well this question is very different than the other question, but both are intentionally foolish misrepresentations of my statements so I reckon my answers would be "wrong" no matter what I said. So I'll just tell you what you wanted to hear the first time: yes, I think "writing a book makes you a historian". 🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    I know, you're trolling attempts were quite heavy-handed, gotta work on your subtlety!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments