A historian must combine the rigor of the scientist with the imagination of the artist. To what extent, then, can the historian be confident about his or her conclusions?

International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge

IB Theory of Knowledge Essay 2: History

Title 2: “A historian must combine the rigor of the scientist with the imagination of the artist.” To what extent, then, can the historian be confident about his or her conclusions?

Thursday April 29th, 2010

When studying or learning history, will anybody ever achieve a state of absolute certainty? Is there even such a thing as certainty? The hardest part of studying history is the gathering of evidence that supports information that is being processed. This evidence is necessary to unravel information about events that have occurred in the past. Evidence is ultimately the main factor that leads to the understanding and knowledge of the occurring of an event. It plays a role in the ‘difficult aspect of studying history’ because there is a question of reliability and credibility of the piece of evidence. The degree of reliability is correlated to the creation of different opinions and points of views that are developed over past events. Different conclusions are made based on the different evidences presented, and even though the historians who make these conclusions believe in them, they know that absolute certainty is unrealistic. Because the evidences that some interpret are biased, the historians need the ‘rigor of the scientist’. And because the ‘rigor of the scientist’ will most typically not tend to fill in every question mark, the ‘imagination of the artist’ helps fill in the voids.

The use of rigor is crucial when it comes to studying history. The use of a scientist’s rigor implies accuracy, which means that there wouldn't be biased opinion, therefore objectivity. Objectivity is necessary for the job of any historian. Historians record and observe main facts with objectivity, while being subjective in getting the cause/results, purpose etc. A noticeably subjective historian will be subject to criticism or questioning because of inaccuracy and a bias; be it cultural, religious, political, etc. Objectivity entails eliminating bias and increase consistency of a neutral stance. For example, if a historian is interested in writing about the increasing role of women in the household during World War I, all the information should be presented. A biased historian would only provide and defend evidence that shows information favoring the thesis about the increasing role of women. Evidence and reports that show the contrary should also be presented, just like the normal argument. The rigorous and objective scientist would include the counter-evidence. Rigor in history entails objectivity and reaching a state of impartialness by having neutral perspective.

This is a preview of the whole essay

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. Therefore, imagination plays a big role in connecting the information acquired from the rigor of the scientist. Imagination, not the fictional-character nor fake-super-hero imagination, but the creative-and-logical imagination-that of an artists-, allows the proper interpretation of history. Imagination allows historians to recreate the past by analyzing things that could have happened as a result of an event occurring, based on any evidence they have. Both reason and perception play a key role here. Reasoning, by using their previous knowledge to infer about what is to happen, and perception, by interpreting things, giving them a meaning and stemming out opinions. For example, the prediction of Osama Bin Laden being dead. Because of his liver problems, his walking using a cane and an immobilized arm, he was said to be dead. Some reasoned that because he suffered from these problems, he was dead. This of course is based on some evidence of injury however there is no solid evidence that proves his death; therefore, imagination has played an evident role. The mind develops the point of view. The people who had a particular form of perceiving and reasoning assumed and believed he was dead. However, not everyone, of course, agreed on this opinion. Because of the fact that every person has different perceptions, emotions, language and reasoning, its likely to have several different conclusions drawn from the same piece of evidence. This is why, unlike rigor, imagination refers more to the subjective part of history.

Both rigor and imagination are necessary to history. While rigor allows the objectivity and main facts to enter into the historian’s knowledge, the imagination fills in the voids uncovered by the rigor. This imagination is –of course- influenced by the individual historian’s perception, reason, emotion and language. He or she will connect the dots brought upon by the rigor using his or her mind. The fact that ones imagination is unique to that of someone else’s proves that it is possible to reach new perspectives on events. This means that new ideas flourish around the world and wide varieties of conclusions are drawn. For example, the political differences which have resulted in the creation of two branches of Muslim religion-the Shias and the Sunnis. The shias believe that Ali, the prophet’s son in law, should have followed in throne after the prophet Muhammad died. The Sunnis, on the other hand, proposed that the new leader should be elected from those capable of the job. While these two groups shared the major ideas and fundaments of the Islamic religion (rigor) it was up to their own way of thinking and imagining by which they picked their branch.

It is important to note that without rigor and interpretation, the world would have one uniform belief. Without rigor and interpretation, it is clear that history could not be neither interpreted by the historians and therefore nor by the future generations of the world. This would mean that either there wouldn't be vast knowledge on previous events or everybody would think the same over a certain event, which is not good for the prosperity of history. If many people would believe that Nazi Germany was the best thing that ever happened, nobody would go into why it was the worst thing. This would mean that multiple perspectives would not occur. Without multiple perspectives, there is a loss of analysis and understanding of history. This results in a loss of enrichment, seen as though there would be a more restricted way of looking at things. Plain acknowledgement of a counterargument does not mean that you believe in it. If anything, it makes you grow by adapting your argument to other person’s beliefs, therefore strengthening your argument, and connecting it to their new perception and reasoning levels.

In conclusion, rigor is important because it provides the main facts behind an event, excluding the bias and basis of unreal facts. Imagination, on the other hand, is what allows the historians to interpret the historical facts. Without the imagination, there would be no interpretation, and without any interpretation, there would be no opinion. Without opinions, there wouldn't be different beliefs and therefore uncertainty is maximized; seen as though there is just a void and uniformity of belief. Everybody would believe the same thing, and their beliefs would be based on their imagination, therefore increasing uncertainty.

All these sources of uncertainty play a role in the confidence of the historian. Because historians imagine things differently, depending on their individual reasoning and perceiving of the real world, they are each going to have individual conclusions that would differ from other historians. Because there are so many perspectives towards historical events, there is increased uncertainty. When a historian takes into consideration these two important sources of error-large number of opinions and lack of certainty-, it’s hard for them be confident about conclusions. Anyhow, since historians trust that evidence is real and believe in their analysis of the events, they are confident about their own conclusions. After they undergo the twofold process of rigor and imagination, they can make a conclusion based on the evidence. This doesn’t mean that they are absolutely certain about what happened. What they record is what they believe, but they of course leave a leeway and are open to error, inaccuracy, and opposing ideas.

In conclusion, since the role of rigor and imagination are crucial to the interpretation of historical events, they are also crucial to the creation of opinions. Because rigor and imagination shape the way in which history is presented to us and since opinions stem from different interpretations of history, rigor and imagination are related to opinions. The creation of more opinions and the difference in thought both increase uncertainty, whose degree describes the confidence that the historian has.

Word Count: 1,377