To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 9274
9273  |  9275
Subject: 
Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 6 Feb 2001 18:11:25 GMT
Viewed: 
622 times
  
Mr L F Braun <braunli1@pilot.msu.edu> schrieb in im Newsbeitrag: G8CJyH.BCq@lugnet.com...
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Arnold Staniczek writes:
History is entirely about interpret-
   ation; there is no such thing as an objective fact in history,
   only prevailing interpretations based on the values and understandings
   of the historian

Hm, let's see: Gerald Ford was a president of the U.S. Is this an objective historical fact or not?

   We makes certain assumptions about its meaning.  We (at least the
   Americans) will all understand these because we're in the same
   rhetorical system.

But don't you differentiate between the fact as such and the assumptions and conclusions you draw from it? To my understanding,
THERE ARE objective facts in history (see above).

Arnold



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
 
(...) There are two levels of mediation: That of the writer, and that of the reader. You and I may agree that Ford being President constitutes and objective fact because our reading (or your writing and my reading) are the same, or similar enough. I (...) (24 years ago, 6-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
  Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
 
(...) I think the main point here is that while some things can be objectively stated, their implications may be subject to historical context. For example, say 100 years from now, it would be true to say that Elizabeth II and Henry VIII were both (...) (24 years ago, 6-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Problems with Darwin's theory
 
(...) We makes certain assumptions about its meaning. We (at least the Americans) will all understand these because we're in the same rhetorical system. But why did you choose Ford? What is the context of the statement, both here and in terms of its (...) (24 years ago, 6-Feb-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

95 Messages in This Thread:





































Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR