History like most artistic disciplines is highly subjective because we are part of the subject of study. The natural sciences are isolated from the self through mathematics. Historians attempting to be more scientific are called economists, but they too fail.
I'd agree with much of that.
The question is, how objective are we about recent events, stuck as we are living with the consequences?
Take a film like 'The Green Berets' Fascinating to watch simply because so Pro-the Vietnam war. It makes you reflect on how we would have seen that war had it panned out differently.
How might we have sen Mussolini had he stayed neutal like Frnco did?
ood for thought on reading philosophy of history
interesting how you take us on a voyage of science and art of history - when i believe as a documentary filmmaker that everybody has a point of view - and also in doing a documentary called - Who's Wearing the Emperor's New Clothes - if so many people believe in something how can it be wrong - exploring the media, propaganda, the power of fear and the fear of power the point in reference is everybody has their own truth as they see it - ie. the Palestinian people have their truth and the Israelis have theirs - to me truth is a convenient lie we want to believe in - or more to the point we all change the facts to fit our needs and history is a fiction of facts or a faction - we tend to believe because we want to desperately believe in something even if it is in our own propaganda - it is said that the hunter tells the his side of the story and the lion has his side which is often never told - so we only get half the story anyway the truth of the matter is that matters of truth are often seen as matters of fact but in fact they are often going along to get along even if its wrong - some food for thought - g-oh
But to take it a step further... our science is only framed by the limits of our discoveries and knowledge. In that sense, it is subjective -- i.e., dependent on our minds and perspectives. I think we are very far from a capacity to be fully objective. But I don't mind.
You've made a good case for studying history, at any rate...got me thinking about that path!
great thoughts! unfortunately I#ll have to drink more coffee before I can follow along this morning...
I#ll try back again later,
cheers!
I was writing a comment but it turned into more of a post: http://offtopic.polygeek.com/264...-
hierarchically
Briefly, I think that the study of History can run the full spectrum from ideal objectivity to extremely subjective. And that's true of many fields of thought. Where history differs from most is that the a subjective the treatment of history is oftentimes, thought not necessarily, more interesting. But put wild subjectivity into, say, chemistry and you get alchemy. Big difference. 
Commenting by HaloScan
