Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Historians have an increasingly strong incentive to tell dramatic stories

ian-leslie.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 256 posts

Re: Historians have an increasingly strong incentive to tell dramatic stories

#71

Post by ip26 »

chargingmarmot wrote: post #70

Tyler Cowen gave a great TED talk on a related topic: "Be suspicious of simple stories" (2009) https://www.ted.com/talks/tyler_cowen_be_suspicious_of_simpl... (Because it's such a great story I still remember the talk a decade later.) """ So if I'm thinking about this talk, I'm wondering, of course, what is it you take away from this talk? What story do you take away from Tyler Cowen? One story you might be like the…

People love paradoxes, so the paradox inherent to Tyler’s story is a really great way for him to anchor his message in your memory. I see that as why he spends so many words on it.

Re: Historians have an increasingly strong incentive to tell dramatic stories

#72

Post by nukeman »

WalterBright wrote: post #63

These attempts to rewrite history to fit a narrative happen all the time. For example, I see constant attempts to deny that the Wrights' 1903 Flyer was the first powered, controlled flight. The evidence presented is always a pile of fanciful conjecture. This rewrite occurs with modern events, too. For example, the narrative on the 737MAX crashes. I've posted about it here many times. On a recent trip, I ran into a 73…

Do you have links to pilot blogs/discussions about this? I’d be curious to give it a read.

Re: Historians have an increasingly strong incentive to tell dramatic stories

#73

Post by ip26 »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #5
bdw5204 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing wrong with stories, either in history or elsewhere. But good vs evil stories are bad history and almost always bad writing too. Reality is almost always either different shades of gray or blue and orange morality. If you can't get beyond your own personal view of morality to be capable of understanding a different perspective, you're probably incapable of doing good history or creating good fiction be…

I generally agree. As I learn more, I realize how much we teach kids younger in their lives is oversimplified, bowlderized BS, no matter the topic. I think that's unavoidable. You have to learn some comic book version of, say, physics before you're ready to talk about the Kuhn and paradigm changes and so forth. But there's also a real danger here: whatever your dumbed-down version of a topic is, it had better be a po…

It doesn’t have to be oversimplified baulderdash. As the whole “ELI5” thing has shown, skillful reduction can preserve the truth and spirit. It’s just not easy.

(It’s actually a lot of fun as a parent trying to do a good job of this)

Re: Historians have an increasingly strong incentive to tell dramatic stories

#74

Post by coding123 »

brindlejim wrote: post #51

The title slightly obscures what's going on here. It's not *just* about stories. It's about the propagation of a dogma in academia. The paper in question is 1619, but for Industrial Age metallurgy. And one of the reasons that lies like this make it through the review process is because academics are afraid of challenging racialist narratives. They win their jobs and promotions by toeing an ideological line.

I think that's what's called rewriting the history books. The narrative du jour causes people to fit everything in a neat little box. Clicks, views -> land better jobs.

Re: Historians have an increasingly strong incentive to tell dramatic stories

#75

Post by WalterBright »

nukeman wrote: post #72
WalterBright wrote: post #63

These attempts to rewrite history to fit a narrative happen all the time. For example, I see constant attempts to deny that the Wrights' 1903 Flyer was the first powered, controlled flight. The evidence presented is always a pile of fanciful conjecture. This rewrite occurs with modern events, too. For example, the narrative on the 737MAX crashes. I've posted about it here many times. On a recent trip, I ran into a 73…

Do you have links to pilot blogs/discussions about this? I’d be curious to give it a read.

No, sorry. I don't follow those blogs unless someone sends me a link to a particularly interesting one.

Re: Historians have an increasingly strong incentive to tell dramatic stories

#76

Post by reckon3r »

demondemidi wrote: post #29

[flagged]

Isn't "ideological emotional-string pulling" what the original historian was after by writing a story that fit the current popular narrative within academia?

Wouldn't holding one fraudulent historian accountable be withholding the credibility of historians, rather than 'despise'ing them?

Are you not the nihilist to be so pessimistic about the intentions of people who agree that the story was fabricated for popularity?

Honest questions that I would be interested in hearing a response to.

Re: Historians have an increasingly strong incentive to tell dramatic stories

#77

Post by WalterBright »

rectang wrote: post #69
WalterBright wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t anyone claiming it was not possible to diagnose I read many times that it was impossible to diagnose it as runaway stabilizer trim. > training for things was bad Stabilizer trim runaway is trained for. Pulling back the throttles for overspeed warning is trained for. > that the crews that experienced crashes had fewer safety features than typical western crews How would you explain not being able to handle r…

> I let them know who I am It's striking to see an argument from authority, against the dominant narrative, deployed in service of dismissing those who purportedly aspire to "rewrite history to fit a narrative".

The way the press reported on it was just despicable.

P.S. in case it isn't clear, I am not a pilot myself, but friends and family are pilots. One just got his Apache Chopper certification! Wow! Me so proud and so envious.

Re: Historians have an increasingly strong incentive to tell dramatic stories

#78

Post by chargingmarmot »

lsmeducation wrote: post #52
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I tend to think of subjective interpretation as "That was good" or "This is bad". But there's something required beforehand: definining what this or that is. It's not really a subjective process, but it certainly isn't objective either. Before you can decide whether or not William the Conqueror's invasion of the British Isles was a good or a bad thing, you first need a description of how the invasion was carried out…

Oh, I meant subjective in terms of your own perspective (informed by world view and life experiences). However you can fit the square pegs into your own round holes. Regardless, I suppose the bigger point I want to make is the truth for non clear cut things is only as true as the number of people that co-sign it. If there’s simply more people on one side, welp, that’s that. That’s the truth, as far as we know. Right…

This reminds me of how historians trying to find out about the historical Jesus have come up with some (objective?) criteria about what to accept as true.

Examples:

* Multiple attestation. Do we have multiple independent sources telling us the same thing?

* Contextual credibility. Do people behave in a way that's plausible given their setting (the languages they spoke, what they knew at the time).

* Embarrassment. Is this detail actually inconvenient for the person relaying it (and not the sort of thing they'd make up)?

see "Criteria of authenticity" in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quest_for_the_historical_Jesus

Re: Historians have an increasingly strong incentive to tell dramatic stories

#79

Post by tiahura »

WalterBright wrote: post #63

These attempts to rewrite history to fit a narrative happen all the time. For example, I see constant attempts to deny that the Wrights' 1903 Flyer was the first powered, controlled flight. The evidence presented is always a pile of fanciful conjecture. This rewrite occurs with modern events, too. For example, the narrative on the 737MAX crashes. I've posted about it here many times. On a recent trip, I ran into a 73…

Isn’t one of the legit criticisms of the max is that the behavior of the cutoff switch and the thumb control was changed without announcing it?

Update from YKW:

Yes, the trim system behavior in the 737 MAX differed from that in older 737 models like the 737NG (Next Generation). In older models, manually adjusting the trim using the thumb switch would generally interrupt and disable automatic trim adjustments, including those by the Speed Trim System, a predecessor to MCAS.

In the original 737 MAX design, using the thumb switches to adjust the trim didn’t necessarily disable the MCAS, which could re-activate and adjust the trim again. This was a significant point of contention and contributed to difficulties pilots faced in maintaining control of the aircraft during the two fatal crashes.

Re: Historians have an increasingly strong incentive to tell dramatic stories

#80

Post by webel0 »

dang wrote: post #13

Recent and related. Others? Does history have a replication crisis? - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37306078 - Aug 2023 (20 comments)

This essay seems to be nothing more than a rehash of, “Does history have a replication crisis?”
Post reply on HN