Historiography: Telling the Truth about History
...people had many questions like “Do Americans need history?” and “Is history a science or an art?” and “Isn’t history really propaganda?”. Relativism states that history should be based on the opinion of the people and that every country has its own version of the truth. Skepticism can encourage people to learn more and remain open to the possibility of their own errors. Hitler was an extreme cultural relativist and more people turned to skepticism, doubting judgements and conclusions. Critics have found racial prejudice in school textbooks. According to them, the books are racist, sexist, homophobic, and Eurocentric. They say that the books focus on the accomplishments of white males and not those of women, minorities, and other oppressed and excluded groups. These critics support relativism. Now the people were split up between relativism and skepticism, asking questions like “Must history be continually rewritten to undo racial and sexist remarks? Relativism questions the ideal of objectivity, because it undermines the belief that people can get outside of themselves in order to get the truth. According to relativism, there can’t be a universal or absolute truth. History has also had political prejudice, honoring Europeans and Americans for their accomplishments, and doesn’t recognize the achievements of other countries in Asia, Africa, and South America. Relativism argues that a democratic practice of history encourages skepticism about dominant views. But at the same time, it trusts in the reality of the past and its knowability. In a democracy, history thrives on a passion for establishing and communicating the truth. But there are always exclusions. There can’t be a perfect democracy. Even now, if a man and a woman apply for a job and have exactly the same skills in that particular job, ...