Because we can make different narratives out of the same facts ?
Even facts themselves are fuzzy.
All history is a fable.
Re: All history is a fable.
The winners write the history and it might take years for the truth to come out.
Re: All history is a fable.
So there can be several fables competing with each other.
We could read about an important battle, like the battle of Hastings, in different school books from different countries.
Are these varying stories fables or truths ?
Do these stories need a kind of moral at the end of them ?
We could read about an important battle, like the battle of Hastings, in different school books from different countries.
Are these varying stories fables or truths ?
Do these stories need a kind of moral at the end of them ?
-
Necromancer
- Posts: 405
- Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2015 12:30 am
- Location: Metropolitan-Oslo, Norway, Europe
- Contact:
Re: All history is a fable.
It doesn't follow from science of history writing that all history is fable. How many ways are there to say that Theresa May is the prime minister of UK?
As we know, there are many ways to say something, but only (very) few ways to state the facts!
It seems to me that to say that all history is fable is to say that no truths exist.
The OP is in debt to write something that has plausibility/credibility to it.
As we know, there are many ways to say something, but only (very) few ways to state the facts!
It seems to me that to say that all history is fable is to say that no truths exist.
The OP is in debt to write something that has plausibility/credibility to it.
Re: All history is a fable.
I was in a way quoting from the novel "Am Gletscher" by Laxness.
The minister at the glacier was convinced of it so I wanted to explore it here.
Let me try to make Ms May part of history (or fable):
"A woman was elected to represent the will of the British people. She was supposed to achieve an agreement to make UK an independent country again."
The minister at the glacier was convinced of it so I wanted to explore it here.
Let me try to make Ms May part of history (or fable):
"A woman was elected to represent the will of the British people. She was supposed to achieve an agreement to make UK an independent country again."
-
EchoesOfTheHorizon
- Posts: 356
- Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:08 am
Re: All history is a fable.
Given that for some bizarre reason many insisted upon having a person with a vagina as the primary qualities to look for in a leader, it isn't completely wrong. May doesn't appear to have a whole lot going for her from a American perspective, otherwise. I'm at the point of looking at the mainstream alternatives and sincerely feel deeply unimpressed.... you can probably find better people at random walking down the street. But it is your system, your political parties, so yeah, whatever, vagina. We support you I guess.
Many tried really hard to elect a vagina to the presidency, but it was attached to a really terrible person, so wasn't allowed into office. It wouldn't be incorrect for a historian to note this was a part of the movement, and continue to be. The democrats are excited that more women candidates than ever are running. I don't care, as I lived in Alaska under Governor Sarah Palin and she ran a very enviromentally friendly, nearly socialist state, and it was full of military spouses alone at one point as about every major deployable unit left.... but the left's reaction to her was she was vile, stupid, a absolute disgusting evil. So I am a little suspect they are not really that concerned about women in leadership roles, or those who by default have proven liberal tract records, as a conservative in Alaska is more liberal than a liberal in Chicago. It is something you don't know about till you go and live in the place, and realize it is a different dynamic. Nobody checks to see it, and the historian's job is to go and check this sort of thing out. bring up questions when paradoxes and contradictions arise.
Many tried really hard to elect a vagina to the presidency, but it was attached to a really terrible person, so wasn't allowed into office. It wouldn't be incorrect for a historian to note this was a part of the movement, and continue to be. The democrats are excited that more women candidates than ever are running. I don't care, as I lived in Alaska under Governor Sarah Palin and she ran a very enviromentally friendly, nearly socialist state, and it was full of military spouses alone at one point as about every major deployable unit left.... but the left's reaction to her was she was vile, stupid, a absolute disgusting evil. So I am a little suspect they are not really that concerned about women in leadership roles, or those who by default have proven liberal tract records, as a conservative in Alaska is more liberal than a liberal in Chicago. It is something you don't know about till you go and live in the place, and realize it is a different dynamic. Nobody checks to see it, and the historian's job is to go and check this sort of thing out. bring up questions when paradoxes and contradictions arise.