History? what is that?

[anaspis]

What is the meaning of History?

TIME

HISTORY

TRAGEDY

[Enjolras]

What is the meaning of History? Temporal spacing is how I would choose to define it. Or do you mean in the sense does history have a meaning, innately? In which case no.

By the by, your username is it a reference to the tumbling flower beetle?


Enjolras.

[anaspis]

Temporal spacing? I think the problem is there. History is something more than the common sense of time. When it is placed the meaning of something, especially history’s, I think the question is for Time. Temporal spacing is only a “moment” or better “fact” with nothingness, as a result no fact. Temporal spacing is math and numbers because we want only to understand each other. But the point is which is the ground of time?




By the way my username does not have a reference to the tumbling flower beetle, but I liked the idea.
Sorry about my english-I am learning hard
Thank you.

[Onasander]

The English language has no certain way, it's a mutt tongue and is very, very flexible; the aim is merely to be understood, which you can clearly be.

History is recalling. Has little to do with temporal sequencing on the whole- that is a kind of history that has developed, but not the only kind. Archeology is related to history, but is a profession with a methodology behind it.... after the dig, it rapidly decends down to the level of philosophy, and continues it nosedive after that to the level of stratification via associations, and then.... da da da.... recall. I am good at recalling. Recalling is as passive as a dead book. Analytical, intuitive, and forensic methodologies play a part in support, but can never be mistaken for..... 'history.'

[Onasander]

repeat

[Onasander]

I thought it would be nice to offer some more insight to my statement. Humans have evolved a massive capacity to record via memorization and using aids to tally complexities. Dhikr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhikr), some catholic methods of rosiery prayer, quipu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quipu) are examples of one kind of complex recall using aids. Quipu shows evidence of utility based reasoning in some of the sequencing. There are countless forms of hand counting around the planet- the chinese can count up into the higher millions of millions on one hand alone by remembering the spot. The sandtables and abacus were of a temporary nature, but we know their effect on written numerical systems in the preservation of history of a then contemporary nature and from the vantage point of today looking back. Placement associations help in recalling. Museums with permanent displays tap into this- as well asindividual sentimental objects- helps to recall history without a need for language.

You also have verbal recitation- the longest poems in the world were maintained via verbal transmission- some until recently.

Many forms of history are maintained in the arts and plays, but from the earlier forms of the 'higher arts' knowledge of mythology had to be known to understand a mosaic or play properly.... again recall. The shia religion has mastered the recall beyond any other race, bloody self mutilating themselves annually to remember a series of battles, most of which took place over a thousand years before.

Iconic art is a form of recall as well, a understanding of the even is needed to be recalled to understand what is often a cryptic scene (some icons are found via archeology and not understood from the context of the picture)

[anaspis]

Firstly, Archeology as a science is an impact of how one understands time. Also, You can look at for instance that archeology in ancient Greece until Kant was not existent. Why? Because the concept of time it was something else. Now, for modern man time is only that: past, present and future. These three aspects of time are without a doubt realities but the ground is something else. Archeology with philosophical aspect reveals and deconstructs the common notion of history and time (even if archelogists do not accept this idea). History is not truth or mistake or facts, if we make this question presuppose the time of past, present and future with common sense (in simple terms "time clock"). Finally, how can you recall something in 19th century if you do not know immediately or you did not live that fact?

Thank you for you advice for English language very much…
I am always learning…
You feel conformable to put it correctly if my mistakes are very... you know

[Onasander]

I've been on a few digs with the local Franciscan University as a kid- there wasn't much of a impact of time so much. It likes- NEVER enters into the situation save for AFTER the fact in the cataloging process.

We dug alot, and sat in there meter square holes..... if not a unstable trench dug out by a back hoe- and just went strata by strata. It teaches you geology, geography, and human behavior, not time. The time aspect comes later when the dirt samples and carbon samples, and wood- is dated. It's mostly just a methodology and guessing game. I remember everyone more focused on the skimpy outfits the women were wearing in the sun- showing off their well tanned bodies and talking continiously about sex on a level that even marines would tire of- horniest academics in the universe. If I was to ever bother with a degree from a uni, it would be a archeology degree. Or perhaps a joke 'introspective scatology diploma' from a diploma mill.

[Enjolras]

“How can history have truth, if truth has a history?” a quote from Foucault (from memory so might not be exact).

My definition is lacking, but only because I didn’t want to fall into the trap of saying that history is a recalling in the sense of a passive retrieval of an “origin”.

“Temporal spacing? I think the problem is there. History is something more than the common sense of time.”

I agree, and the deficit of my definition is that it was an attempt to describe the structure of time without asserting our relationship towards it. Then even saying “towards it” is wrong, as we are in it not towards it as such.

“When it is placed the meaning of something, especially history’s, I think the question is for Time. Temporal spacing is only a “moment” or better “fact” with nothingness, as a result no fact. Temporal spacing is math and numbers because we want only to understand each other. But the point is which is the ground of time?”

If I am reading you correctly (and please do correct me if I am not), you are criticizing a common (or commonsensical) , vulgar sense of time. Kant grounded time in the unity of the subject, law of succession etc... and we get the distinctions past, present and future. This structure however is what you are questioning... if I am following you correctly. Would it be an abuse if I equated with what you stated as a “moment” with the “present”?

Indeed, what you are doing in questioning the presumption of the presence of the present by saying that on the contrary it is a void, that there is not a full presence of the present... if that makes sense? Through this you are re-opening the question of the grounding of time other than in a subject, a subject present to itself?


Enjolras.

[anaspis]

But this is the point: the presence of the present or the essence of the present is absence. The present is present only when is absence, present always presences itself and this is the way of its hiding.

Time is the way to Being. Is a movement no for somewhere but anywhere. "Time is the breath of the Spirit" (Levinas).

Time is not a movement toward somewhere. Does not leave anything behind. Artifact is the proof that human being have the possibility of technique.
Man can recognize something as history because has a historical perception of himself only because is already in-the-World. The World reveals itself as Time.

We do not separate Time from human being and from the World. It can be said that History is a manifestation of Time.

You could see the language. The essence of language is not tool for communication with past, present and future tenses but the way, poetic way, which we can see only the shadow of Being.


I hope to understand a little because it is difficult to express my self philosophically. thank you for the discussion