Tom_in_CA
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2013
- Messages
- 20,821
I suppose you can watch the same story being reported by MSNBC and FOX and NOT notice the differences? I can.
So to make sure : You're exempt from this rule-of-thumb, right ?
I suppose you can watch the same story being reported by MSNBC and FOX and NOT notice the differences? I can.
That's not politics. I can, and have, read various historians that do not agree. So, obviously "historians" are not 100% accurate all the time. And yes, history is written by the victors. If you don't believe me, read some history books that were written 60 or 70 years ago and compare them to ones written today.
The Civil War is referred to as "The War of Northern Aggression" down South. Perfect example of the losers in a war trying to re-write history and give it their own slant on something...
Huh ? The "history that is taught" inc's the "history" I spoke of in post #17
The Civil War is referred to as "The War of Northern Aggression" down South. Perfect example of the losers in a war trying to re-write history and give it their own slant on something...
Let’s not fight the Civil War all over again. Please move on.Someone apparently doesn't understand history. The southern states, through their elected legislators voted to seceed from a union that the states voluntary entered into with each other. When they attempted to do so, they were invaded by the union. Sounds like aggression to me.
Everybody puts their own slant on things, EVEN so-called "historians". Unless of course you think Lincoln invaded the South to stop slavery.
......... there is plenty of great history books without bias or agenda............
.......... This thread is interesting, as to 'expertise' being put forth, ..........
By the way, TOM didn't really say that......a Thomasonian did.How about this summary : Science doesn't say anything. ScienTISTS say things. History doesn't say anything histORIANS say things. Politics doesn't say anything, PoliTICIANS say things. News doesn't say anything. NewsCASTERS say things. And so forth. Eh ?
And if anyone says they're not biased about their world-views-of-things, they're : Not 'fessing up. That includes me, here & now : Guilty as charged !
See how one can lose control of the narrative,My original post was just about The history channel as a tv channel and the need for ratings to make the money. Now it's turned into a thread that makes me think that somewhere today two friends will be fencing each other with their detectors over the civil war.............
Someone apparently doesn't understand history. The southern states, through their elected legislators voted to seceed from a union that the states voluntary entered into with each other. When they attempted to do so, they were invaded by the union. Sounds like aggression to me.
Well I don't know, we are getting quite expansive here.Good post Xxray.
And I would also add that : Those that try to dismiss whatever some other source says, by merely attaching the word "biased" to it (Eg.: "history is written by the victors, blah blah"), will always implicitly exempt themselves . In other words, by their measure, you can dismiss whatever other citation/source they don't like, because those citation/sources HAVE to be "biased", according to them.
But notice they do not apply that same measuring standard TO THEIR OWN views . Of whatever-the-subject-at-hand happens to be. In other words, they exempt themselves. As if they, alone, are the un-biased ones of the world. Mighty convenient of them, eh ?
By "slant" there ^ ^ , I assume you mean various inaccuracies. Right ?
If so, then order to take that ^ ^ for a test drive, I need to ask you : Does "everybody" include you as well ? Or are you exempt this accusation of necessary inaccuracy ? For example, is this statment true that:
"... Everybody puts their own slant on things...",
Or can I dismiss this, since .... you said it, and it's therefore slanted ?
Do you see how the statement becomes self-refuting ?
What will they do when they bring the big cannons CTX ? subeMy original post was just about The history channel as a tv channel and the need for ratings to make the money. Now it's turned into a thread that makes me think that somewhere today two friends will be fencing each other with their detectors over the civil war..............No doubt one will have a Manticore and the other a Deus II.....and I hate to say this but the Legend would probably be the sturdiest one for fencing. Hey......Wait a minute........I just created the next History channel metal detecting show.
........ If I say that the sky is blue, my "slant" does not make that statement false ..........