Pasadilla, Joshua Macmiel 09/15/2022

CBA-BSA-BFA

DISCUSS THE BASIC ARGUMENT BETWEEN SUBJECTIVITY VERSUS

OBJECTIVITY IN HISTORY

History is subjective, much like all other subjects because the practitioners are the subjects.
Truthfulness is a fiction. You can measure the temperature objectively, but interpreting what it signifies
or indicates involves making an inferential jump that is only possible subjectively. Hard sciences have a
strict process that allows for shared subjectivity since most domains have established ideas about what
constitutes a good inference.

History is the same, however there are now two more issues. First of all, everyone who produced the
primary sources that historians use to examine the past did it from their own point of view. So, in order
to attempt to determine what is real, what is imagined, what is due to viewpoint, and what is fabrication,
historians must piece together these varied, sometimes contradicting testimonies. You must realize that
everything else than the broadest, most basic historical claims is significantly more subjective than
objective.

History is the study of the past, yet the past is no longer here and will never return. Since we cannot to
travel through time, we can never directly examine objects of our research instead, we can only look at
the effects it had on people and things.