The historians task is to understand the past the human scientist, by contrast, is looking to change the future. Is this true?

Authors Avatar by 16swalemrmarymountlondoncom (student)

“The historian’s task is to understand the past; the human scientist, by contrast, is looking to change the future.”

To what extent is this true in these areas of knowledge?

By. ------ ----------

The oxford dictionary defines History as “The whole series of past events connected with a particular person or thing”1. Whilst Human science is defined as ''The study and interpretation of the experiences, activities, constructs, and artifacts associated with human beings'' 2.Many arguments have been made to whether history could be regarded as a human science. Some say that History is indeed a human science merely due to it's use of past events for references of the present. Whilst others disagree because, unlike human sciences, history cannot observe the past. Instead it searches for evidence historians engage in to study the past human events. In this essay I will be analyzing to what extent the statement “The historian’s task is to understand the past; the human scientist, by contrast, is looking to change the future.” is true.

History is an area of knowledge that depends on a blend of both the truth and understanding. Each history student is a result of their social  ideals and their strategy is based on their own perception. However this perception ,in many cases, is shaped by their knowledge of the past. If a historian knew only one side of an event from the past he/she will most likely form a bias opinion. Whilst a historian who has explored both sides of the same event will most likely form a nonpartisan opinion. For example the Treaty of Versailles is still discussed by historians on whether it's reparation were fair on Germany. The fact that this discussion continues to this day supports the idea that history was designed to explore ideas from the past.

Join now!

On the contrary, observations made by historians on the two world wars could actually agree with both sides of the statement. One of the reasons why observations regarding the causes and effect of the wars are still being made is to help prevent an outbreak of war in the future. If one were to understand the impact war could have both the people and their countries they, most likely, will endeavor to prevent a war from happening. So through this example, we can see that by understanding the past one can foresee a better future.

Another example ...

This is a preview of the whole essay