• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

A historian must combine the rigour of the scientist with the imagination of the artist. To

Extracts from this document...


"A historian must combine the rigour of the scientist with the imagination of the artist." To what extent, then, can the historian be confident about his or her conclusions? Writing history, argues Thur´┐Żn, can be likened to building a house, with the facts resembling the building material. "One has to have good building material and construct the building so that it is strong. But what the house will look like in the end does not only depend on the material, but also on the architect / historian."1 This is, to my mind, a good analogy of the view that history, as the 5 subject studied by a historian, is a combination of scientific and artistic - or, in the extension, objective and subjective - knowledge. Some aspects of the end result are always determined by the facts available. If there is only timber, it is bound to be a wooden house and if there is yellow paint, the house will be yellow. But, as we all know, no two architects would build identical houses of the same building material. And, while a serious historian cannot ignore his facts, he has 10 to use his imagination to form a whole. ...read more.


After all, all knowledge is based upon observation of the 45 world, and in a larger perspective ultimately treat the same questions. Now, with the walls raised, we can go on to the roofing. Flaubert once commented that 'writing history was like drinking an ocean and pissing a cupful'2 - a comment that seems to hold some truth. The condensation from an endless amount of information into something useful, the essence, must involve a selection. The problem is thus that history has to be the historian's choice, based on 50 his or her interpretations. Consequently, doubts can be raised as to whether the selection and interpretation processes reflect the object of study, reality, satisfactorily. Asking a Palestinian Arab historian and an Israeli Jewish historian about the history of Palestine/Israel would perhaps result in slightly different answers. Furthermore, some historians even argue that history is created the moment it is written. This is a view that acknowledges the subjective influences in history, and 55 emphasises the artist's influence on the historian's work. The view of others, that the historian's task is to uncover the traces of history through documents, accounts and other evidence, seemingly has the scientific rigour as the dominant influence on the historian. ...read more.


Admittedly, the more information, the closer is the gap between different interpretations, but the point should still be clear. Information and historical facts always have to be interpreted and put in a context, and in this process insecurities do exist. So which conclusions can be drawn from the discussion above? To say that a historian can never be confident about his or her conclusions would mean that the subject of history is reduced to no 95 more than an advanced form of guesswork, and that would be, despite the problems of history, an exaggeration. On the other hand, saying that the historian can be fully confident, combining the forces of the scientist and the artist would, to my mind, be to disregard the implications of the problem of objectivity and reliability of history itself. The hardly exciting answer is, hence, that the answer is somewhere in the middle. When all criteria are met, adequate facts have been 100 presented, critically interpreted and put in a proper context, the historian can to a large extent be confident about his or her conclusions. However, due to the nature of the subject, a historian can never, be fully confident. The architect, returning to the opening analogy, can only hope that his house will sustain the tests to which it is going to be exposed. (1571 words) ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge essays

  1. What similarities and differences are there between historical and scientific explanations?

    If the experimental results confirm your hypothesis or observation, then a scientific law or explanation has been found. This is best defined by Jacob Bronowski (1908-74) "Science is a way of describing reality; it is therefore limited by the limits of observation, and it asserts nothing which is outside of

  2. A historian must combine the rigor of the scientist with the imagination of the ...

    The imagination of the artist also plays a key role to studying and recording history. The use of rigor does not always answer all questions and fill in all the gaps, because of the limited availability and amount of information released from evidences.

  1. Comparing Flatland and Plato's analogy of the cave.

    Perfect Intelligence stage Plato concludes that the real world is not what we see but what we understand or feel in an intelligible world. For Plato, knowledge gained through the senses (empirical experience) is no more than opinion. Knowledge gained through philosophical reasoning is certain.

  2. A historian must combine the rigour of the scientist with the imagination of the ...

    be acknowledged and accepted at least by a majority of the scientific society and adequate proofs have to be presented; otherwise it would be just a theory among many. On the other hand, artistic knowledge does not strive for universality or replicability, since I is based on the individual's experiences.

  1. ToK Essay What similarities and differences are there between historical and scientific explanations?

    Modern scientists can obtain knowledge from old discoveries and observe data from past events right before their eyes by means of experimentation.

  2. Assess the claim that 'we value art because it expresses the feelings of the ...

    Preoccupation with the author leads away from the poem, thus we should only consider the evidence internal to the art rather than trying to guess at that the artist was trying to express. Further critique has also been made of the emotivist theory - there is an extent to which

  1. Whats going on in Gaza?

    * Palestinian factions called a ceasefire as well a few hours later. * It was widely reported by the media that this ceasefire was first breached by Palestinians on Jan 27th. * In reality, however, Israel had already violated the ceasefire at least seven times, including killing two farmers -

  2. Which is the more important attribute of the historians; the ability to analyse evidence ...

    establish new theses which would require the ability to develop interpretation of evidence of evidence using creative imagination. However, my opinion is that everyone is able to establish new theses (whether evidence can provide ground or not) just like telling stories; yet specific techniques and skills are required to analyse

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work