What do you think about hypothetical history?

Suppose that history is at best an intellectual game, and that even real history cannot achieve the purpose of discovering the truth, substance, and meaning. History is the things and times that have passed, and you say that the time and things that have passed have not been ifs? In fact, the only absolute value in the world is history, and even if there is, it is no longer possible.

I don't think this kind of hypothetical history has any practical significance, because history is something that has already passed, and there are too many factors at that time that are destined to be inevitable.

Hypothetical history is a fake thing, why should it be used as a hypothesis if it does not happen at all, and it is not allowed to be related to history.

There is no need to delve into the history of that kind of hypothesis, after all, it is a hypothesis that can only be used for reference. Something that refers to ancient history, but not very accurate.

The hypothetical history is just a kind of speculation or conjecture made by later generations on the stories of their predecessors according to the historical situation, after all, it is not a real historical event, and it cannot be fully trusted.

I don't think so. Otherwise, everything in history would have become predestined, and I still believe in human subjective initiative. Even if the subjective initiative is false, it is better to believe than not to believe.

In my own personal opinion, I think that hypothetical history does not exist, and history has no hypothesis, only truth and falsehood.

Because history is the trend of the general trend, no one can go against the general trend of the whole history.

Therefore, there are no assumptions in history, but history has inevitability, and there are many contingencies. Those fortuitous events may have lit the fuse.

or accelerated the course of events, all of which have a certain impact on the entire history.

Therefore, many people like to discuss the contingencies, hoping to be able to assume that they happen or not. However, it is necessary to recognize a few points, first of all, the occurrence of accidental events is caused by the general trend, and if the trend of the entire historical trend remains unchanged, then basically the line of development will not change.

Therefore, contingencies can only cause a slight deviation in the development of things, but they cannot change the direction of the whole process. In addition, there are some inevitable factors in the occurrence of accidental events, which are difficult to avoid.

Historical features:

1) The pastness of the form of existence. History is the past human society grinding practice activities, it can not be repeated, can not experiment, people can only through words, objects, films, and other intuitive teaching aids, the abstract things are visualized, the generalized things are concrete, and the historical knowledge is transformed into a picture of life with the description of language, so that students can indirectly know or perceive history.

2) Diversity of cognitive structures. The relationships between subjective and objective, internal and external causes, and causes and effects in the process of social development are very complex. Therefore, in the process of learning historical knowledge, the cognitive approach is flexible and changeable, and historical events should not be understood from a single perspective, but should be understood and thought from multiple directions and perspectives.

3) Mindset.

Differentiation and flexibility. Think differently.

It is the reverse thinking of conventional directional thinking, and it is a creative way of thinking that can break the mindset.

Reveal the essential characteristics and internal connections of objective things, and create new thinking results. This is a high-level form of thinking, which is conducive to expanding students' thinking and improving their innovative thinking ability.

Categories: Culture Art >> historical topics.

Problem description: History is a serious topic, so can history be assumed, or overturned?

Analysis: Suppose that a historical or "counterfactual" question is explicitly counter-questioned: why ask? Why care about what hasn't happened? And, most importantly, history cannot be reconstructed, and the past cannot be re-enlived.

But it is not necessarily fanciful that we imagine that we have avoided mistakes, or that we have not been lucky enough to avoid them. Of course, we fully understand that we can't turn back time and that past behaviors can't be changed. But this imagining of non-facts is an important way of learning, and since judgments about the future are usually based on estimating the potential consequences of other possible actions, it is not unreasonable to compare the actual results we get with what we might expect.

If one believes that history cannot be assumed, then it is likely to fall into a kind of fate, that is, everything is predestined. In this respect, there is a profound distinction between religious historians, materialists, and idealists. Religious historians see the role of God as the fundamental (though not necessarily the only) cause of historical events; Materialists explain history in terms of universal laws similar to science, which is a scientific theology, science, or universal law that takes the place of God; Idealists, on the other hand, view history as the transformation of past ideas by historians through imagination into an intelligible (and often teleological) structure.

What is consistent with all three is that they all believe that history cannot be assumed.

But there is no inevitability for the triumph of historical determinism, and there is no evidence that human society will necessarily develop to its present state. Just like chess or any other game, the past is a different story, and there is no predetermined ending. The possibilities of history are much more complex than the possibilities of mathematics or physics, and God does not play with dice, and man is not God's dice.

Because it is already an established fact, it cannot be changed, which means that there is no way.

Man must not go against the heavens and go against the laws of nature and society.

Because history has already happened and cannot be changed.

Because it's gone, the butterfly effect.

First of all, it is related to the nature of the discipline of history. History is the most concerned with the connection with the past in all humanities, and it does not emphasize the imagination and fiction of literature, and under the enduring influence of positivist historiography, it has become the responsibility and pursuit of historians to restore the past as accurately as possible. Therefore, when people talk about history, they are talking more about the yearning for the truth.

Second, history is not impossible to assume. In the view of postmodern historiography, history is not a restoration of the past, but a competition and choice of different texts, or in other words, different statements and proposals. Marx also pointed out that the ideology of a period often has its material basis and practical basis, and no discussion is made out of thin air.

Thus, if history is viewed as a narrative of the past by historians of different eras rather than a record of it, history is not only hypothetical, but fundamentally made up of assumptions. It is "impossible to assume" because the hypotheticist's narrative challenges existing, accepted historical narratives, in short, subverting popular perceptions or going against the cultural strategies of the ruling class.

The question of whether history can be assumed or not is theoretically related to the contingency and inevitability of history. History, unlike literature and philosophy, pursues an inevitability. Although there are infinite possibilities at any stage of history, in the end, there is only this "road traveled" in front of us, so the so-called "inevitability of history" has become a problem that many people are puzzled about.

For example, social scientists try to propose laws and explain their inevitability in an empirical way, but in many cases the reason why history is what it is inexhaustible, which is why many people explain history in absolutes that resemble divine will, such as Hegel's "absolute spirit". It is recommended to read Hayden White's Metahistoriography, Anksmidt's Historical Performance, and Lovett's World History and Redemptive History (translated by Li Qiuling).