我们怎么了解美国历史?（一）
正文翻译
How do I know USA history?
我们怎么了解美国历史?
How do I know USA history?
我们怎么了解美国历史?
评论翻译
John Sullivan
Do you like to read? There are hundreds of books on the history of the United States.
Suggest: A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn. America's Hidden History by Kenneth C. Davis.
There are many others. A quick web search will provide massive sources. The obxt will be to read factual and truthful events, which can be challenging, as we have learned over time that history we were taught was accurate for years, has been subject to upxes and corrections.
你喜欢读书吗?有无数本关于美国历史的书。
建议读:霍华德·津恩的《美国人民历史》。肯尼斯·戴维斯的《美国隐藏的历史》。
还有很多其他的书籍。快速网络搜索可以提供大量的资源。我们的目标是阅读事实和真实的事件，这可能是具有挑战性的，因为随着时间的推移，我们已经了解到，多年来我们被教授的曾认为是准确的历史，一直受到更新和更正。
Do you like to read? There are hundreds of books on the history of the United States.
Suggest: A People's History of the United States by Howard Zinn. America's Hidden History by Kenneth C. Davis.
There are many others. A quick web search will provide massive sources. The obxt will be to read factual and truthful events, which can be challenging, as we have learned over time that history we were taught was accurate for years, has been subject to upxes and corrections.
你喜欢读书吗?有无数本关于美国历史的书。
建议读:霍华德·津恩的《美国人民历史》。肯尼斯·戴维斯的《美国隐藏的历史》。
还有很多其他的书籍。快速网络搜索可以提供大量的资源。我们的目标是阅读事实和真实的事件，这可能是具有挑战性的，因为随着时间的推移，我们已经了解到，多年来我们被教授的曾认为是准确的历史，一直受到更新和更正。
John Salman
There are many ways to learn about the history of the United States. Some options include:
Reading books or articles about US history
Visiting museums or historical landmarks
Taking a class or online course on US history
Watching documentaries or films about US history
Participating in educational tours or reenactments
Consulting primary sources such as letters, diaries, and government documents
It may also be helpful to focus on specific time periods or themes that interest you, as the history of the United States is vast and comple
了解美国历史有很多方法，包括这些选项:
阅读有关美国历史的书籍或文章
参观博物馆或历史地标
参加美国历史课程或在线课程
观看有关美国历史的纪录片或电影
参加教育旅游或倡导历史重演的活动
查阅第一手资料，如信件、日记和政府文件
专注于你感兴趣的特定时期或主题也可能会有所帮助，因为美国的历史博大精深
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
There are many ways to learn about the history of the United States. Some options include:
Reading books or articles about US history
Visiting museums or historical landmarks
Taking a class or online course on US history
Watching documentaries or films about US history
Participating in educational tours or reenactments
Consulting primary sources such as letters, diaries, and government documents
It may also be helpful to focus on specific time periods or themes that interest you, as the history of the United States is vast and comple
了解美国历史有很多方法，包括这些选项:
阅读有关美国历史的书籍或文章
参观博物馆或历史地标
参加美国历史课程或在线课程
观看有关美国历史的纪录片或电影
参加教育旅游或倡导历史重演的活动
查阅第一手资料，如信件、日记和政府文件
专注于你感兴趣的特定时期或主题也可能会有所帮助，因为美国的历史博大精深
原创翻译：龙腾网 https://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Rik Elswit
The purpose of American History as taught in our schools is to generate and promote patriotism, and it’s bowdlerized to make us look noble. Look at all the blowback about teaching children that racism in the US is systemic, and embedded in our laws and culture.
Present it as the story of how we got here, warts and all, and you’d have a far more receptive audience, and one where they didn’t suspect that they were being lied to. It’s actually a ripping and gripping yarn which they ruin by trying to make heroes of the colonists and slaveowners. We’ve actually done great things as a nation, but the twisting of the tale ruins it.
Teach that this country, both good and evil, is always in process, and that what it is, up to us.
我们学校教授的美国历史的目的是培养和促进爱国主义，它被美化了，使我们看起来很高尚。看看在美国以种族主义的方式系统性的教育孩子，并且将其根植于我们的法律和文化中所带来的反弹吧。
把它作为我们是如何发展到今天的故事，不掩盖地呈现出来，你都会有一个更容易接受的观众，他们不会怀疑自己被欺骗了。这实际上是一个扣人心弦的故事，他们试图把殖民者和奴隶主塑造成英雄，结果毁了它们。事实上，作为一个国家，我们历经了很多伟大的事情，但扭曲的故事破坏了这一切。
告诉他们，这个国家，不管是好是坏，总是在发展中，它是什么样，这取决于我们自己。
The purpose of American History as taught in our schools is to generate and promote patriotism, and it’s bowdlerized to make us look noble. Look at all the blowback about teaching children that racism in the US is systemic, and embedded in our laws and culture.
Present it as the story of how we got here, warts and all, and you’d have a far more receptive audience, and one where they didn’t suspect that they were being lied to. It’s actually a ripping and gripping yarn which they ruin by trying to make heroes of the colonists and slaveowners. We’ve actually done great things as a nation, but the twisting of the tale ruins it.
Teach that this country, both good and evil, is always in process, and that what it is, up to us.
我们学校教授的美国历史的目的是培养和促进爱国主义，它被美化了，使我们看起来很高尚。看看在美国以种族主义的方式系统性的教育孩子，并且将其根植于我们的法律和文化中所带来的反弹吧。
把它作为我们是如何发展到今天的故事，不掩盖地呈现出来，你都会有一个更容易接受的观众，他们不会怀疑自己被欺骗了。这实际上是一个扣人心弦的故事，他们试图把殖民者和奴隶主塑造成英雄，结果毁了它们。事实上，作为一个国家，我们历经了很多伟大的事情，但扭曲的故事破坏了这一切。
告诉他们，这个国家，不管是好是坏，总是在发展中，它是什么样，这取决于我们自己。
Ah L?m
Technically speaking, the US only has 47 states.
Virginia, Kentucky, and Massachusetts are technically “commonwealths”, and not states.
Honolulu, Hawaii, is the most isolated city on the planet. It is over 2,000 miles to the nearest city, San Francisco
Reno, Nevada is farther west than Los Angeles, CA
Maine is the closest state to the African continent
The United States has no official language at the federal level, but states can set up their own official languages. For example, California’s official language is English.
Four of the first five presidents (George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and James Monroe) were from Virginia. As such, the early era of the United States was known as the Virginia Dynasty.
New York City has around 9 million people… meaning there are more people living in NYC than in about 40 of the other states.
严格意义来讲，美国只有47个州。
严格意义来讲，弗吉尼亚州、肯塔基州和马萨诸塞州是“联邦”，而不是州。
夏威夷的火奴鲁鲁是地球上最与世隔绝的城市，它距离最近的城市旧金山有2000多英里。
内华达州的里诺比加利福尼亚州的洛杉矶更为靠西。
缅因州是离非洲大陆最近的州
美国在联邦一级没有官方语言，但各州可以设立自己的官方语言。例如，加州的官方语言是英语。
前五任总统中有四位（乔治·华盛顿、托马斯·杰斐逊、詹姆斯·麦迪逊和詹姆斯·门罗）来自弗吉尼亚州。因此，美国早期被称为弗吉尼亚王朝。
纽约市约有900万人口，这意味着纽约市的人口比其他40个州的人口加起来还要多。
Technically speaking, the US only has 47 states.
Virginia, Kentucky, and Massachusetts are technically “commonwealths”, and not states.
Honolulu, Hawaii, is the most isolated city on the planet. It is over 2,000 miles to the nearest city, San Francisco
Reno, Nevada is farther west than Los Angeles, CA
Maine is the closest state to the African continent
The United States has no official language at the federal level, but states can set up their own official languages. For example, California’s official language is English.
Four of the first five presidents (George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and James Monroe) were from Virginia. As such, the early era of the United States was known as the Virginia Dynasty.
New York City has around 9 million people… meaning there are more people living in NYC than in about 40 of the other states.
严格意义来讲，美国只有47个州。
严格意义来讲，弗吉尼亚州、肯塔基州和马萨诸塞州是“联邦”，而不是州。
夏威夷的火奴鲁鲁是地球上最与世隔绝的城市，它距离最近的城市旧金山有2000多英里。
内华达州的里诺比加利福尼亚州的洛杉矶更为靠西。
缅因州是离非洲大陆最近的州
美国在联邦一级没有官方语言，但各州可以设立自己的官方语言。例如，加州的官方语言是英语。
前五任总统中有四位（乔治·华盛顿、托马斯·杰斐逊、詹姆斯·麦迪逊和詹姆斯·门罗）来自弗吉尼亚州。因此，美国早期被称为弗吉尼亚王朝。
纽约市约有900万人口，这意味着纽约市的人口比其他40个州的人口加起来还要多。
Tim O'Neill
How do we know the history is the real history?
The idea that "history is written by the winners" is a clichéd truism that isn't actually very true. History is actually written by academics trained in a careful scholarly method and working within a system of peer review, both of which serve to discard unlikely or obviously biased interpretations. It works toward an argument to the best explanation - ie one that explains as much of the evidence as possible and which is agreed is the most likely version of what happened in the past.
The Historical Method is based on three fundamental steps, each of which has its own techniques:
我们如何知道历史才是真正的历史？
“历史是由胜利者书写的”是一句陈词滥调，但事实并非如此。事实上，历史实际上是由受过严谨学术方法训练的学者撰写的，他们在同行评议的制度下工作，这两种制度都有助于摒弃不太可能或明显有偏见的解释。它倾向于一个最佳解释的论证，即尽可能多地解释证据，并被认为是过去发生的事情的最可能的版本。
了解历史的方法基于三个基本步骤，每个步骤都有自己的技巧:
How do we know the history is the real history?
The idea that "history is written by the winners" is a clichéd truism that isn't actually very true. History is actually written by academics trained in a careful scholarly method and working within a system of peer review, both of which serve to discard unlikely or obviously biased interpretations. It works toward an argument to the best explanation - ie one that explains as much of the evidence as possible and which is agreed is the most likely version of what happened in the past.
The Historical Method is based on three fundamental steps, each of which has its own techniques:
我们如何知道历史才是真正的历史？
“历史是由胜利者书写的”是一句陈词滥调，但事实并非如此。事实上，历史实际上是由受过严谨学术方法训练的学者撰写的，他们在同行评议的制度下工作，这两种制度都有助于摒弃不太可能或明显有偏见的解释。它倾向于一个最佳解释的论证，即尽可能多地解释证据，并被认为是过去发生的事情的最可能的版本。
了解历史的方法基于三个基本步骤，每个步骤都有自己的技巧:
1. Heuristic- This is the identification of relevant material to use as sources of information. These can range from the obvious, such as a historian of the time's account of events he witnessed personally, to the much less obvious, like a medi manor's account book detailing purchases for the estate. Everything from archaeological finds to coins to heraldry can be relevant here. The key word here is "relevant", and there is a high degree of skill in working out which sources of information are pertinent to the subject in question.
启发式 这是对相关材料的识别，用作信息来源。这些可以是显而易见的，比如历史学家对他亲眼目睹的事件的描述，也可以是不太明显的，比如中世纪庄园的账簿，详细说明了庄园的购买情况。从考古发现到钱币再到纹章学，一切都与此相关。这里的关键词是“相关”，要找出哪些信息来源与所讨论的主题相关，需要高度的技巧。
启发式 这是对相关材料的识别，用作信息来源。这些可以是显而易见的，比如历史学家对他亲眼目睹的事件的描述，也可以是不太明显的，比如中世纪庄园的账簿，详细说明了庄园的购买情况。从考古发现到钱币再到纹章学，一切都与此相关。这里的关键词是“相关”，要找出哪些信息来源与所讨论的主题相关，需要高度的技巧。
2. Criticism- This is the process of appraisal of the source material in the light of the question being answered or subject being examined. It involves such things as determining the level of "authenticity" of a source (Is it what is seems to be?), its "integrity" (Can its account be trusted? What are its biases?), its context (What genre is it? Is it responding or reacting to another source? Is it using literary tropes that need to be treated with scepticism?) Material evidence, such as archaeology, architecture, art , coins etc needs to be firmly put into context to be understood. Documentary sources also need careful contextualisation - the social conditions of their production, their polemical intent (if any), their reason for production (more important for a political speech than a birth certificate, for example) , their intended audience and the background and biases of their writer (if known) all have to be taken into account.
批评——这是根据被回答的问题或被检查的主题对原始材料进行评估的过程。它涉及诸如确定来源的“真实性”水平之类的事情（它是看起来的那样吗？）、它的“完整性”（它的说法可信吗？它的偏见是什么？）、其背景（它是什么类型的？它是在回应还是在回应另一个来源?它是否使用了需要持怀疑态度对待的文学修辞?）物质证据，如考古、建筑、艺术、硬币等，需要牢牢地放在历史背景中才能被理解。文献来源也需要进行仔细的背景分析——他们制作的社会条件、他们的争论意图（如果有的话）、他们的制作理由(例如，对政治演讲来说比出生证明更重要)，他们的目标受众以及作者的背景和偏见(如果知道的话)都必须考虑在内。
批评——这是根据被回答的问题或被检查的主题对原始材料进行评估的过程。它涉及诸如确定来源的“真实性”水平之类的事情（它是看起来的那样吗？）、它的“完整性”（它的说法可信吗？它的偏见是什么？）、其背景（它是什么类型的？它是在回应还是在回应另一个来源?它是否使用了需要持怀疑态度对待的文学修辞?）物质证据，如考古、建筑、艺术、硬币等，需要牢牢地放在历史背景中才能被理解。文献来源也需要进行仔细的背景分析——他们制作的社会条件、他们的争论意图（如果有的话）、他们的制作理由(例如，对政治演讲来说比出生证明更重要)，他们的目标受众以及作者的背景和偏见(如果知道的话)都必须考虑在内。
3. Synthesis and Exposition - This is the formal statement of the findings from steps 1 and 2, which each finding supported by reference to the relevant evidence.
The key difference between this method and those used in the hard sciences is that the researcher lays all this material, its analysis and his conclusions out systematically, but the conclusions are a subjective assessment of likelihood rather than an obxtive statement of probabilistic induction. This subjectivity is what many trained in the sciences find alien about history and lead them to reject history as insubstantial.
综合与阐述 这是对步骤1和步骤2中发现（每个发现都得到了相关证据的支持）的正式陈述。
这种方法与硬科学中使用的方法的关键区别在于，研究人员系统地列出所有这些材料、分析和结论，但这些结论是对可能性的主观评估，而不是对概率归纳的客观陈述。这种主观性正是许多受过科学训练的人对历史感到陌生的地方，并导致他们拒绝接受历史，认为历史是虚无的。
The key difference between this method and those used in the hard sciences is that the researcher lays all this material, its analysis and his conclusions out systematically, but the conclusions are a subjective assessment of likelihood rather than an obxtive statement of probabilistic induction. This subjectivity is what many trained in the sciences find alien about history and lead them to reject history as insubstantial.
综合与阐述 这是对步骤1和步骤2中发现（每个发现都得到了相关证据的支持）的正式陈述。
这种方法与硬科学中使用的方法的关键区别在于，研究人员系统地列出所有这些材料、分析和结论，但这些结论是对可能性的主观评估，而不是对概率归纳的客观陈述。这种主观性正是许多受过科学训练的人对历史感到陌生的地方，并导致他们拒绝接受历史，认为历史是虚无的。
But the key thing to understand here is that the historian is not working toward an absolute statement about what definitely happened in the past, since that is generally impossible except on incidental points nof fact (eg there is no doubt that Adolf HItler was born on April 20 1889). A historian instead works to present "the argument to the best explanation". In other words, the argument that best accounts for the largest amount of relevant evidence.
This means that there is never a definitive version of history - the best historians can come to is a general consensus It also means that any consensus is always being re-examined and potentially revised by the next generation of young historians. And that new types of information get added to the heuristic (eg blogs, social media records) and So our understanding of the past can never become a fixed orthodoxy.
但这里要理解的关键是，历史学家并不是在对过去肯定发生的事情做出绝对的陈述，因为这在一般情况下是不可能的，除非是偶然事件(例如，阿道夫·希特勒生于1889年4月20日，这是毫无疑问的)。相反，历史学家致力于提出“最好的解释”。换言之，最能说明问题的、相关证据数量最多的论点。
这意味着，历史永远不会有一个明确的版本；最好的历史学家所能达成的是普遍共识。这也意味着，任何共识都会被下一代年轻历史学家重新审视和修订。新类型的信息被添加到启发式中（例如博客、社交媒体记录），因此，我们对过去的理解永远不会成为一种固定的正统观念。
This means that there is never a definitive version of history - the best historians can come to is a general consensus It also means that any consensus is always being re-examined and potentially revised by the next generation of young historians. And that new types of information get added to the heuristic (eg blogs, social media records) and So our understanding of the past can never become a fixed orthodoxy.
但这里要理解的关键是，历史学家并不是在对过去肯定发生的事情做出绝对的陈述，因为这在一般情况下是不可能的，除非是偶然事件(例如，阿道夫·希特勒生于1889年4月20日，这是毫无疑问的)。相反，历史学家致力于提出“最好的解释”。换言之，最能说明问题的、相关证据数量最多的论点。
这意味着，历史永远不会有一个明确的版本；最好的历史学家所能达成的是普遍共识。这也意味着，任何共识都会被下一代年轻历史学家重新审视和修订。新类型的信息被添加到启发式中（例如博客、社交媒体记录），因此，我们对过去的理解永远不会成为一种固定的正统观念。
The popular perception of the past is substantially determined by the way these carefully analysed perspective on history filter down into popular culture. Historians and students of their work can and do write popularisations or help produce documentaries which can help to achieve this. But other elements can make popular perception resistant to this influence. The prejudice of many people against religion has meant that the Nineteenth Century idea that religion has always been an enemy of science is still a very strong element in popular culture, despite the fact actual historians of science rejected this "Conflict Thesis" almost a century ago.
大众对过去的看法在很大程度上是由这些仔细分析的历史视角渗透到大众文化中的方式决定的。历史学家和学习他们作品的学生也确实可以写通俗读物或帮助制作纪录片，这有助于实现这一目标。但其他因素可能会使公众的看法抵制这种影响。许多人对宗教的偏见意味着，19世纪认为宗教一直是科学的敌人的观点仍然是流行文化中一个非常重要的因素，尽管事实上，科学史学家在近一个世纪前就拒绝了这种“冲突论”
大众对过去的看法在很大程度上是由这些仔细分析的历史视角渗透到大众文化中的方式决定的。历史学家和学习他们作品的学生也确实可以写通俗读物或帮助制作纪录片，这有助于实现这一目标。但其他因素可能会使公众的看法抵制这种影响。许多人对宗教的偏见意味着，19世纪认为宗教一直是科学的敌人的观点仍然是流行文化中一个非常重要的因素，尽管事实上，科学史学家在近一个世纪前就拒绝了这种“冲突论”
And very popular novels or movies can reinforce ideas about the past which have no academic support. Thanks to Braveheart, generations of people are convinced medi Scots wore kilts and blue war paint (they wore neither). Thanks to Washington Irving's novel A History of the Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus (1828) people are still convinced the medi Church taught that the earth was flat. Academic history has a major influence on how we see the past, but it's not the sole determinant.
But only people who are very naive and have no understanding of history as an academic discipline think history is simply a matter of taking sources from the time at face value. Historians do precisely the opposite of this - they analyse source material with extreme scepticism and use multiple sources and types of material in their heuristic to get the broadest and most obxtive view of the past possible.
非常受欢迎的小说或电影可以强化那些没有得到学术支持的关于过去的认知。多亏了《勇敢的心》，几代人都坚信中世纪的苏格兰人穿着苏格兰方格呢短裙和蓝色战漆（实际上他们都不是这种穿着打扮）。多亏了华盛顿·欧文的小说《克里斯托弗·哥伦布生平与航海史》（1828），人们仍然相信中世纪教会教导的“地球是平的”的认知。学术史对我们看待过去的方式有很大影响，但它并不是唯一的决定因素。
但是，只有那些非常天真、不把历史当作一门学科来理解的人，才会认为历史只是从表面上看那个时代的资料。历史学家的做法恰恰相反——他们以极端怀疑的态度分析原始材料，并在他们的启发中使用多种来源和类型的材料，以尽可能获得最广泛、最客观的有关于过去的认知。
But only people who are very naive and have no understanding of history as an academic discipline think history is simply a matter of taking sources from the time at face value. Historians do precisely the opposite of this - they analyse source material with extreme scepticism and use multiple sources and types of material in their heuristic to get the broadest and most obxtive view of the past possible.
非常受欢迎的小说或电影可以强化那些没有得到学术支持的关于过去的认知。多亏了《勇敢的心》，几代人都坚信中世纪的苏格兰人穿着苏格兰方格呢短裙和蓝色战漆（实际上他们都不是这种穿着打扮）。多亏了华盛顿·欧文的小说《克里斯托弗·哥伦布生平与航海史》（1828），人们仍然相信中世纪教会教导的“地球是平的”的认知。学术史对我们看待过去的方式有很大影响，但它并不是唯一的决定因素。
但是，只有那些非常天真、不把历史当作一门学科来理解的人，才会认为历史只是从表面上看那个时代的资料。历史学家的做法恰恰相反——他们以极端怀疑的态度分析原始材料，并在他们的启发中使用多种来源和类型的材料，以尽可能获得最广泛、最客观的有关于过去的认知。
Kip Wheeler
Several methods help:
Crosschecking sources, especially when you have possibly neutral sources that don’t have a dog in the fight with potentially biased sources.
Archaeological confirmation. Yes, a battle did happen here. How do we know? All these arrowheads, etc.
Weighing historical narratives against common archetypal or mythic ones. If a known mythical version of an event can be dated to an earlier time than a later text that retells the same narrative as a historical one, the odds increase this is an upxed version of a legend rather than a factual one, or at least any historical event like this may have been exaggerated or spliced into that older legend.
Realizing that the phrase “history is written by the winners” is never absolute. Our archives are filled with historical records written by losers as well.
有助于了解历史的几种方法：
交叉检查来源，尤其是当你有可能有中立的消息来源，而这些消息来源不会与潜在的有偏见的消息来源相冲突。
考古确认：是的，这里确实发生过一场战斗。我们怎么知道的?所有这些箭头，等等。
权衡历史叙述与共同的原型或神话故事：如果一个已知的神话版本可以追溯到比后来的文本更早的时间，而这些文本复述了与历史事件相同的叙述，那么这是一个传说的更新版本而不是一个事实，或者至少任何像这样的历史事件都可能被夸大或拼接到那个更古老的传说中。
意识到“历史是由胜利者书写的”这句话从来都不是绝对的。我们的档案里也充满了失败者写的历史记录。
Several methods help:
Crosschecking sources, especially when you have possibly neutral sources that don’t have a dog in the fight with potentially biased sources.
Archaeological confirmation. Yes, a battle did happen here. How do we know? All these arrowheads, etc.
Weighing historical narratives against common archetypal or mythic ones. If a known mythical version of an event can be dated to an earlier time than a later text that retells the same narrative as a historical one, the odds increase this is an upxed version of a legend rather than a factual one, or at least any historical event like this may have been exaggerated or spliced into that older legend.
Realizing that the phrase “history is written by the winners” is never absolute. Our archives are filled with historical records written by losers as well.
有助于了解历史的几种方法：
交叉检查来源，尤其是当你有可能有中立的消息来源，而这些消息来源不会与潜在的有偏见的消息来源相冲突。
考古确认：是的，这里确实发生过一场战斗。我们怎么知道的?所有这些箭头，等等。
权衡历史叙述与共同的原型或神话故事：如果一个已知的神话版本可以追溯到比后来的文本更早的时间，而这些文本复述了与历史事件相同的叙述，那么这是一个传说的更新版本而不是一个事实，或者至少任何像这样的历史事件都可能被夸大或拼接到那个更古老的传说中。
意识到“历史是由胜利者书写的”这句话从来都不是绝对的。我们的档案里也充满了失败者写的历史记录。
Familiarity with particular chroniclers. If you know that Gerald of Wales’ Topography of Ireland is filled with errors and naive acceptance of local legends, you assess his historical claims more skeptically than another chronicler of the same time period who is taking more effort to get at the truth. The same is true if a Galician chronicler has a burning hatred of the Basque—you learn who has which biases the more you read.
Familiarity with modern propaganda. If you know a modern historian has ties to a particular country or cause, you look at his claims more skeptically than another historian who doesn’t.
Familiarity with academic publishing. If your only sense of history comes from random web pages thrown at you by Google, and you think “historical research” is primarily webbrowsing, you are at a disadvantage compared to readers who know how major specialist journals do peer review to help eliminate bias and propaganda and error.
Accepting boredom. In the search for truth, 99% of the details will be boring minutia for outsiders, but real historians know that’s where the truth lies. If you are reading material that “sexes up” history and dramatizes primarily the weird, the exciting, and the controversial in 2-minute sound bites, the odds increase that you are looking at distorted history rather than actual history.
熟悉特定的编年史：如果你知道威尔士的杰拉尔德的《爱尔兰志》充满了错误和天真地接受当地传说的现象，与同一时期的另一位更努力地寻找真相的编年史专家相比，你对他的历史主张持更怀疑的态度。如果一个加利西亚编年史专家对巴斯克有着强烈的仇恨之心，情况也是如此——你读得越多，就会知道谁有哪种偏见。
熟悉现代宣传：如果你知道一位现代历史学家与某个特定的国家或事业有联系，相比另一位没有相关联系的历史学家，你会更怀疑他的说法。
熟悉学术出版：如果你对历史的唯一感觉来自谷歌随机性推给你看的网页信息，并且你认为“历史研究”主要是浏览网页，那么与那些知道主要专业期刊如何进行同行评审以帮助消除偏见、宣传和错误的读者相比，你的知识是有缺陷的。
接受无聊：在寻找真相的过程中，99%的细节对局外人来说都是无聊的细节，但真正的历史学家知道这就是真相所在。如果你读的材料把历史“性别化”，把奇怪的、激动人心的和有争议的事情戏剧化，在两分钟的录音片段中，你看到的是被扭曲的历史而不是真实的历史的可能性就会增加。
Familiarity with modern propaganda. If you know a modern historian has ties to a particular country or cause, you look at his claims more skeptically than another historian who doesn’t.
Familiarity with academic publishing. If your only sense of history comes from random web pages thrown at you by Google, and you think “historical research” is primarily webbrowsing, you are at a disadvantage compared to readers who know how major specialist journals do peer review to help eliminate bias and propaganda and error.
Accepting boredom. In the search for truth, 99% of the details will be boring minutia for outsiders, but real historians know that’s where the truth lies. If you are reading material that “sexes up” history and dramatizes primarily the weird, the exciting, and the controversial in 2-minute sound bites, the odds increase that you are looking at distorted history rather than actual history.
熟悉特定的编年史：如果你知道威尔士的杰拉尔德的《爱尔兰志》充满了错误和天真地接受当地传说的现象，与同一时期的另一位更努力地寻找真相的编年史专家相比，你对他的历史主张持更怀疑的态度。如果一个加利西亚编年史专家对巴斯克有着强烈的仇恨之心，情况也是如此——你读得越多，就会知道谁有哪种偏见。
熟悉现代宣传：如果你知道一位现代历史学家与某个特定的国家或事业有联系，相比另一位没有相关联系的历史学家，你会更怀疑他的说法。
熟悉学术出版：如果你对历史的唯一感觉来自谷歌随机性推给你看的网页信息，并且你认为“历史研究”主要是浏览网页，那么与那些知道主要专业期刊如何进行同行评审以帮助消除偏见、宣传和错误的读者相比，你的知识是有缺陷的。
接受无聊：在寻找真相的过程中，99%的细节对局外人来说都是无聊的细节，但真正的历史学家知道这就是真相所在。如果你读的材料把历史“性别化”，把奇怪的、激动人心的和有争议的事情戏剧化，在两分钟的录音片段中，你看到的是被扭曲的历史而不是真实的历史的可能性就会增加。
Anderson Dourado
George W. Bush was US President in September 2001. He had visited a school in Florida to talk to 8-year-olds. Bush had prepared a speech on truancy.
Before the president entered the room, the White House security officer claimed that a plane had crashed into one of the World Trade Center towers. However, it was still thought to be a small plane, it could just be an accident.
The president went to read a book with the children. Shortly after, the second plane hit the other tower.
The entourage returned to the airport and boarded the presidential plane. The decision was not to return to Washington DC at that time — the White House could be a target. The plane first went to a base in the state of Louisiana. From there, he went to another base in Nebraska, where there was a video call meeting.
Finally, the entourage returned to Washington DC. On the flight, it was possible to see smoke coming out of the Pentagon building, the headquarters of the US Armed Forces. That night, he delivered a White House speech in which he made it clear that the country would respond.
2001年9月，乔治·布什担任美国总统。他参观了佛罗里达州的一所学校，与8岁的孩子交谈。布什准备了一篇关于逃学的演讲。
在总统进入房间之前，白宫安全官员声称一架飞机撞上了世贸中心的一座大楼。然而，人们仍然被认为那是一架小型飞机，它可能只是一场意外事故。
总统和孩子们一起读书去了。不久之后，第二架飞机撞上了另一座大楼。
随行人员返回机场，登上总统专机。当时的决定是不返回华盛顿特区，因为白宫可能成为袭击目标。这架飞机首先飞往路易斯安那州的一个基地。从那里，他去了内布拉斯加州的另一个基地，在那里举行一个视频电话会议。
最后，随行人员返回华盛顿特区。在飞行中，可以看到五角大楼的美国武装部队总部冒出浓烟。当晚，他在白宫发表讲话，明确表示美国将做出回应。
George W. Bush was US President in September 2001. He had visited a school in Florida to talk to 8-year-olds. Bush had prepared a speech on truancy.
Before the president entered the room, the White House security officer claimed that a plane had crashed into one of the World Trade Center towers. However, it was still thought to be a small plane, it could just be an accident.
The president went to read a book with the children. Shortly after, the second plane hit the other tower.
The entourage returned to the airport and boarded the presidential plane. The decision was not to return to Washington DC at that time — the White House could be a target. The plane first went to a base in the state of Louisiana. From there, he went to another base in Nebraska, where there was a video call meeting.
Finally, the entourage returned to Washington DC. On the flight, it was possible to see smoke coming out of the Pentagon building, the headquarters of the US Armed Forces. That night, he delivered a White House speech in which he made it clear that the country would respond.
2001年9月，乔治·布什担任美国总统。他参观了佛罗里达州的一所学校，与8岁的孩子交谈。布什准备了一篇关于逃学的演讲。
在总统进入房间之前，白宫安全官员声称一架飞机撞上了世贸中心的一座大楼。然而，人们仍然被认为那是一架小型飞机，它可能只是一场意外事故。
总统和孩子们一起读书去了。不久之后，第二架飞机撞上了另一座大楼。
随行人员返回机场，登上总统专机。当时的决定是不返回华盛顿特区，因为白宫可能成为袭击目标。这架飞机首先飞往路易斯安那州的一个基地。从那里，他去了内布拉斯加州的另一个基地，在那里举行一个视频电话会议。
最后，随行人员返回华盛顿特区。在飞行中，可以看到五角大楼的美国武装部队总部冒出浓烟。当晚，他在白宫发表讲话，明确表示美国将做出回应。
很赞 1
收藏