Post 05: An Argument for History

    The subject of history has a valid argument for being the absolute most important subject you can not only learn at an early age but expand knowledge upon later in life--specifically, a major in college. It takes the average person some time to realize that the life they live now is a result of everyone else's life which was lived before them, good or bad. Now, of course most know this and brand it as common sense, but they've never thought about the implications behind it--all history, really is just the application of all lives and events that happened before now to now. So, of course it's important and of course it should be expanded upon, right? 

    Yet, even with the complete catalogue of observable history being available to us, some view the teaching of it as a bad thing.  Why is this so? In order to prove these people wrong, we must find out, then logically decide why it is wrong at all. Most people with this anti-history viewpoint often use it to defend their own beliefs or ideals, saying that "it is foolish to focus on the past". While this may be true, to learn history is not to "focus" on the past, it is to "study" it--by doing so, seasoned historians and beginning history majors alike develop a "nuanced understanding of human behavior, cultural diversity, and social change" (Doc2). This asset is undisputedly important for both academics and everyday life in general.

    The dismissal of all learnings and teachings of history as "focusing on the past" is a classic inductive reasoning dilemma, such as stated by Jones in her essay "Finding the Good Argument or Why Bother with Logic?" with her example using the condemning of single mothers. To paraphrase her words, generalizing any one questionable factor (i.e., statistics surrounding single mothers, conflicts with history) as the root of something bigger and more detrimental ("the root of all social ills in America") is not an educated hypothesis, and an instance of taking inductive reasoning "too far".

    While this is an example of botched inductive reasoning, this isn't to say all inductive reasoning is bad, for that would be doing what Jones warned of, and against the point of this post entirely--to welcome history. The truth is that without close watch and study, history is doomed to repeat, which is why its sharp dismissal by many is concerning. Even so, all people of the world have the potential to change history--depending on the path they take, for the better, or the worse.