I really liked this podcast this week. I have always thought that history was really interesting, even though it is very complicated. Sometimes, it seems like a lot of history doesn’t really matter because that was then and we are in the now. However, it does because it allows us to know the why, even if the exact why or what is contested. It shapes how we think and why we do. In high school, we learned that history goes in cycles, and if we know what has happened in the past, we can predict what might happen in the future. We can be wary of danger signs and make more informed decisions to avoid tragedies (like examining a dictator’s rise to power, etc.) I have struggled with the study of history only because it seems like it is all recorded from a bias – which it is as Dr. Bezio mentioned in her podcast. I know it’s still important but it is hard when a lot of what we know is shaped by white men, yet again. I thought that the point that there were more poor people than there were white, Christian men and they still dominated the conversation is so perplexing (even though it really isn’t…). There’s so much we don’t know because history has historically been recorded very poorly. I think it is really interesting that in 100 years, there’s going to be people trying to study what we are doing now and why. They will have SO much information that it might honestly be harder to piece it all together. Everyone can have their place in history. And if we have come this far, so quickly, it is weird to see where the study of history will go because I feel like with the new age of media, everyone gets to show their experience, not just the white men as it was for so long.
Critical Thinking
I really like the point you bring up about history shaping how we think and why we do. I also like that you bring up the fact that this history that shapes us is mostly bias. This is something I didn’t really understand until my leadership class last semester and it is something that has stuck with me. I used this example in another comment, but if it weren’t for my leadership class last semester I would have never learned about Claudette Colvin, and while she is less widely recognized than Rosa Parks, she is still a very important figure in the civil rights movement.
I think that history always has two sides of the story. I think we are doing a disservice to both ourselves and society when we fail to realize this but mostly when we use this as justification to resist change. This reminded me a lot of what is going on right now on campus.
I’m glad you brought up the “history repeats its self” point. I was thinking it while I was reading this podcast but I also know that many people (specifically scholars and if I remember correctly from my class with him last semester Dr. Hayter) dislike when people say that. Not because it isn’t true in a sense but that it is more complicated than that. I think that we can definitely see parterns repeat in history and I think we are seeing that today in the Pandemic (COVID vs Spanish Flue) Voter suppression and more.
I like your point about thinking where history will go in the future. With our new age of media everyone can pretty much control their own narrative of history. I wonder how historians in the future will sort through all the information they will have to understand our current society. Will it be easier to understand history with not enough information that is biased or with possibly too much information?
I think you make a good point about using history to see patterns and predict what may happen in the future. I think it ties well to the quote in the podcast “those who do not study history are condemned to repeat it”.