|
|
Re: Do we need History as part of our education?katrinamae said Aug 9, 2007, 4:18 PM: |
||
|
Through Art, that's how to teach non-biased history! I learned more history in two semesters on Art History than I had in my entire schooling life (accept interests that I persued on my own outside of school). And it's was wonderfully unbiased, because we were learning about art, and you can't teach art history without talking about some of the most beautiful and tragic histories of each culture, since those things often inspire art. I think that from a young age, we should study “World History” and “Art History” and “Comparative Religions” and “World Mythologies,” instead of so much U.S. history, stuffed down our throats. That would give us a true world view, an interconnectedness among humans. I think those are the four most important subjects I've studied in my life, and I had to wait to receive three of them in college, and one of them from a book that was given to me (The Power of Myth, by Joseph Campbell) and a book I sought (A History of God, by Karen Armstrong)! What crap! |
|||
|
|
Re: Do we need History as part of our education?Enlightened.thinker said Aug 10, 2007, 8:28 AM: |
||
|
I'v e taught World Civilizations in college and most of the students have never studied anything more than their own history. I confuse them at times with my approach, a more social and biographical history, one Thomas Carlyle espoused when he said “history is biography”. |
|||
|
|
Re: Do we need History as part of our education?katrinamae said Aug 10, 2007, 9:58 AM: |
||
|
Oh no, no, no! :) BOTH books are absolutely wonderful - I meant it was “crap” that I had to wait 'til I was out of regular schooling before I learned those wonderful things about the religions of the world and the myths and connections! Sorry, Tuan! |
|||
|
|
Re: Do we need History as part of our education?Keith said Aug 10, 2007, 3:30 PM: |
||
|
Yes, Curmudgeon, tis your busy season now, so we understand. |
|||
|
|
Re: Do we need History as part of our education?katrinamae said Aug 10, 2007, 10:49 PM: |
||
|
Wow, Curmudgeon, what a treasure-trove for a young'un like myself! I hope you know that your list will not go unnoticed or unused. ;) |
|||
|
|
Re: Do we need History as part of our education?janos said Aug 11, 2007, 3:07 AM: |
||
|
Yes, yes! But what kind of history? Not the kind that put my wife off history for life (dates and kings and battles). |
|||
|
|
Re: Do we need History as part of our education?andrew said Aug 15, 2007, 6:38 PM: |
||
|
We love you Curmudgeon! i love Karen Armstrong's books, very informative…. |
|||
|
|
Re: Do we need History as part of our education?Curmudgeon [no longer around] said Sep 5, 2007, 11:11 AM: |
||
|
Well, I knew I'd get sucked back in… at least a little. No apologies necessary, except for misspelling my name. And I liked what you had to say for the most part. I have been reading a book entitled England and the Crusades… it isn't here right at the moment so I'll have to post the author's name later… and it is apparent from that book where he explicitly mentions the distortions of chroniclers for their own agenda, and from any book you might like to read about the Gnostics, as a for instance, where we had little understanding f gnosticism apart from the polemics of those who were persecuting them. It wasn't until the Nag Hammadi library was discovered that we had an extensive collection of texts from the time of the Gnostics. That is just one example. I posted somewhere about the origin of the idea of Lemuria in the racism of european geographers unable to accept the navigational genius of the Polynesians. Etc., etc. I think that many of the strange conspiracy theories that propose complicated explanations for political realities, especially if they rely on secret cadres of ultra-powerful groups (generally including Jewish Bankers… an immediate red flag) are often a swallowing whole, or maybe a selective swallowing, of old conspiracies that often have their origin in the animosities of long gone parties, resulting in “histories” that have been accepted over time, told and retold as if they were truth and reemerge in the “New Age” where astonishingly gullible people will once again propagate them with very little research into where the information comes from. To quote (roughly) the old professor in The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe: “What do they teach the children in school these days?” I mean come on, if you hear about a conspiracy that relies on complicated conditions of secrecy, how can you believe it? If we have discovered anything today it is that very little is really secret. Especially if it involves many people, and/or if it involves governmental agencies. I mean even the Bildergergers, the supposedly secret controllers, are hardly secret. And really, is it the Bilderbergers, or the Masons, or the Rothschilds, or the British Royals, or who, that really control everything? It can't be all of them. And do you really think it would be possible to have the Twin Towers blown up in secret?? OK. Anyway, we are probably pretty close on The Conspiracy thing, but why label the existence of a hierarchy in human affairs a conspiracy? In what way is what you are proposing different from what Marx & Engles or many others proposed, except maybe that it is supposedly based on “spiritual” principles? Globalization is going to die from its own folly long before we can make a dent in it. Sometimes a little extended thought goes a long way (is that redundant?). The problem is that we don't have the patience to do the research. And if you feel like you have to apologize for a moderately “long” post, where will we be if we have to say something really involved. We can't get all our information from magazines or from Wiki. And we have to be able to be clear even in long thoughts. My time is up for now, but I'll be watching the thread… enjoy |
|||

Help



