Do historians tend to believe in a sort of "false realism"

Fantasus

Ad Honorem
Jan 2012
2,381
Northern part of European lowland
You probably need an explanation her of what I mean by "false realism". Some sort of belief that the task of historians are both to find out the "facts of the past" and to find the causes of later events the students of history have to look back at their causes further back in time. To think that later events could influence earlier history may sound odd and unacceptable for reason. But is it so? If we by "later events", or timelines, mean the "real past", probably yes.
If we think about it as the futures people then anticipated, then it seems reasonable to think about them as often all important for understanding their actions. Anyone operating on markets would probably try to find out about how to get the best results (profits) in the future, and may be less interested in the past. The same for anyone making any kind of projects, and especially for those who make decisions leading to war or peace or choosing strategies and tactics. So history is not only about "real facts of the past", and sometimes the fears, expectations, hopes, desires and wishes of earlier times would matter at least as much.
 

Fantasus

Ad Honorem
Jan 2012
2,381
Northern part of European lowland
The Marxist way of thinking history could perhaps fit?
 
Feb 2017
425
Minneapolis
The Marxist way of thinking history could perhaps fit?
I think by "example" folks mean a specific historian saying a specific thing. Such an example would clarify your meaning and ground your generalizations in something actual.
 

aggienation

Ad Honorem
Jul 2016
9,813
USA
I think by "example" folks mean a specific historian saying a specific thing. Such an example would clarify your meaning and ground your generalizations in something actual.
Marx works. Its a common behavior. To explain something complex by making overly simplified generalities based on nothing more than opinion and bias. Why is it done? Because humans are idiots.
 
Feb 2017
425
Minneapolis
Marx works. Its a common behavior. To explain something complex by making overly simplified generalities based on nothing more than opinion and bias. Why is it done? Because humans are idiots.
Do you have an example? :cool:
 

Fantasus

Ad Honorem
Jan 2012
2,381
Northern part of European lowland
I think by "example" folks mean a specific historian saying a specific thing. Such an example would clarify your meaning and ground your generalizations in something actual.
The problem here is it is about a general impression. So even if I could remember any specific quotatios that would hardly mean that much.
Then I will.ass.my.quesrion was.im a way about what historians says little about. They are do not as far as I know them say much about how people.in the.past thought about their future though there could be examples.I have forgotten. But if I am not completely wrong about this I can hardly give examples of how different writers either ignore or pay less attention to such thinking. I think the first world history I read in parts was one old Grimberg. It was long ago I last took a look at it but I don't remember there was much in its 20 volumes about what I asked for in my first post.
 
Feb 2017
425
Minneapolis
The problem here is it is about a general impression. So even if I could remember any specific quotatios that would hardly mean that much.
Then I will.ass.my.quesrion was.im a way about what historians says little about. They are do not as far as I know them say much about how people.in the.past thought about their future though there could be examples.I have forgotten. But if I am not completely wrong about this I can hardly give examples of how different writers either ignore or pay less attention to such thinking. I think the first world history I read in parts was one old Grimberg. It was long ago I last took a look at it but I don't remember there was much in its 20 volumes about what I asked for in my first post.
I'm having trouble understanding what you're saying. It may be that I'm just dense but it does seem like a concrete example would go a long way toward clarifying what you mean. Are you talking about backward causality like certain weirdnesses found in quantum physics? Are you talking about a kind of history of the future where we examine past people's views of their futures? I'm just not sure. Even a hypothetical example would be good.