Skip to main content

Errors in Studying History

There are many things to keep in mind when one is a student of history. The most important feature that one needs is an open mind. Unfortunately, that seems to be the least common attribute that any academic has this day and age. The prevalent misconception is that either you are open minded and thus naive, or you are skeptical and thus intelligent and knowledgeable. This is a flawed sentiment, for having an open mind allows you to, without bias, observe and analyze an idea, thought, theory solely on its merit, and you can do this logically and rationally and critically. In academic circles, where skepticism is a requirement, it is both the PC label for close minded and the scholarly equivalent of double-dog dare daring them to not only prove their idea, but to prove it beyond your own personal biases and dogmas, usually an impossible feat indeed. 

Photo credit Nikola Solic
Our ancestors have left us with a plethora of clues about themselves that we need only unravel. However, in order to accurately and successfully accomplish re-constructing our past we have to stop using our measures to judge. In keeping with the thought that Neanderthals have been completely given the total short end of the stick and made out in our history and science books to be big dumb brutes I want to point out how such misconceptions are so easily made and propagated.


Egocentric eyes need to be refocused into wondering and curious eyes that are open to ALL possibilities. Man today is not better and more advanced, man today is different from man of other times. The whole world is different therefore everything about our worlds differs. One need only look at all the differences among all the peoples that live in our time to see this for themselves. One of the most despicable and deplorable things that an academic can do is to judge their area of study against themselves or their standards. Just because you drive a sports car and live in a high-rise and some other person walks and lives on a covered platform with open walls does not make you advanced and them barbaric or savage.

The same can be applied to history, just because a culture didn't have the wheel does not mean they were mentally inferior, that they were not 'smart enough' to invent it, it simply means in most cases, they had not developed a reason for using it. As the saying goes, necessity is the mother of all invention; another words if you do not have need of the wheel you will not invent it. For example, the South American cultures, of which the Inca are the most famous, did not have the wheel, however, their gold smelting and smithing quality was better than what our so advanced societies accomplish today with all our technologies. And academics still consider the Inca's to be a less advanced society, our less advanced selves 500 years ago labeled them as savages and deemed them not much better than slaves and forced labor sources.

Gilgamesh

Another egocentric method that we use in demeaning our ancestors is to judge those that had written documents based on our own perceptions of reality and fact and fiction. We read their stories and history and at best only accept those things that our narrow view of life can understand, the rest we call myths and tales and fiction. So inept are academics at having open minds in this area that the same piece of writing can be used to support our "facts and truths" while also proving what "fiction" writers the people were. And if a culture didn't have a writing system especially one understood today then they are considered even more uncivilized.

Moving further back in time when 'judged' by today's experts, those peoples that look different from us, well they are not even human, or at best they were sub-human predecessors to our totally modern human selves of today. The attitude that we are the perfection of the animal world and of the long line of peoples that have lived on this wonderful planet is the most arrogant and ignorant point of view that blocks our ability to fully understand our past and marvel in the amazement of our ancestors.
via Smithsonian Magazine

Neanderthal should not be considered brutish cause of their physical features, just as they should not be considered stupid cause to the best of our knowledge they lived in existing caves. And they should not be considered uncivilized because they did not, to our knowledge have language, oral or written.

If we could teach the next generation of academics to study out of love of curiosity with open minds and child like enthusiasm, we will be amazed at how wonderful and rich our pre-history past was and will have to rewrite much grander tomes on our journey through time on the 3rd rock from the Sun.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Join Us For The Journey

Cassi Merten So while I have not been doing a lot of writing in quite awhile, I have still been doing a lot of reading, research, and following of others' research and theories. I have, also, been working out my next pursuit in my head and on paper, so to speak. I have long thought that the "official" story of humanity has some major contradictions and errors in it. Even as a child, raised basically in a christian'ish belief system, I always had questions about things that made no sense to me or that did not seem to tell the whole story or answer all the questions that I had. Questions like; if Adam and Eve were the first people then why did Cain need to be marked? Didn't ALL the people (his family) already know who he was and what he did? And if everyone was going to descend from Adam and Eve then wouldn't they all know who Cain was already? Of course some versions say that God sent them out to find wives, again if Adam and Eve were the first then where...

From Giza to Gobekli Tepe

One of the things that interest me most and inspires me to learn more and read more and research more are the enigmas around us. Those pieces of the puzzle of our story that don't fit nicely where we are told that they should fit and the pieces that are sitting off to the side cause the 'experts' are not quite sure what to do with them, they cannot deny them, but there is no room for them in their solid unbending version of history. Our story should never be set in stone, it should be allowed to grow and change and shift as we learn more and more about where we come from and how we got where we are. We must remind ourselves that we have not searched every millimeter of dirt and earth, we have not preserved every manuscript, document, monument that recorded the histories and legends of our ancestors, worse, we have destroyed more of our story than we have ever preserved. So we should never judge as if we have or know it all. One of the most illustrious examples of this...

"There Was NO Global Deluge......"

via englishare.net The Great Flood is marginalized by many academics which is a shame. The definition of great and or global seems to be what inhibits them from being able to pursue the story that has been remembered by peoples all over the world as more than just a story. I have to say, to be honest I am sometimes surprised that we have managed to learn as much as we have considering how limited the view of academics can be. There have been various investigations into finding Noah's flood . There are several major stories that have been used to guide searchers for the proof of this global flood. In addition to Noah, we have the Epic of Gilgamesh , the tales of Atlantis and Lemuria, and the oddities of Tiahuanco. However, sometimes, even the fringe investigators with a focused passion can get as narrow-viewed as the 'mainstream academics'. Where the academic denies everything that seems to be outside the normal and mundane annals of approved history, the fanatic...