Is history useless?

[Phrossack]

I just need to get this off my chest. It's been causing a minor existential crisis for me. I know I've mentioned this topic in passing before, but I think it warrants a thread.

Almost as long as I can remember, I've been fascinated by history. Mainly by the military aspect, but other things, as well. I read mainly history books (when I actually read, that is), enjoy discussing history, took history classes for fun in high school, play almost no games but those with a historical theme, and so on. I want to be a history professor some day.

Or, perhaps, wanted. I've come to the conclusion that not only is it a ridiculously long and difficult path to become one, and difficult once you've succeeded, but also that the job of history professor, and the whole subject of history itself, is mostly (not completely, but mostly) irrelevant to society.

The main defense of their profession put forth by historians is that we learn history to prevent repeating the mistakes of the past. Of course, the hole in this argument is that every situation is different. I can't come up with any good examples at the moment, but I know that at least some of you understand what I'm saying because this forum is where I got that idea.

It seems to me, then, that the one of the only reasons to study history is because it's interesting. Well, lots of things are interesting. Ancient and medieval weapons technology, in my case. But that subject is almost totally worthless.

Another reason might be because, if you're into history, studying it could help get you an enjoyable history-related job. But why do those jobs exist? Why does society, or at least parts of it, deem the study of history to be worthwhile enough to pay people to do it? I think it's ridiculous that actors and sports players make millions, but at least they're popular and in demand. They, at least, can entertain people. What are historians good for?

Let me state that I know we have to know at least some history, particularly that of the last century or two. Otherwise, it would be impossible to understand things like modern Islamic fundamentalism, women's rights, and a host of other things. But do we really need hundreds of thousands of historians publishing millions of books, documentaries, articles, and silly little research articles with such a narrow, obscure, academic, and insignificant focus that only a handful of highly specialized other historians will ever read them?

I'm probably overthinking this. There are lots of almost useless little jobs. But I'm deeply worried that the only job that I'd both maybe like and maybe be good at is useless to society. I want to feel useful and productive, and writing obnoxiously specialized and irrelevant crap in an academic style that is incomprehensible and boring to the average person doesn't seem useful. Maybe I could help write high school and college history textbooks, because frankly a lot of them are just awfully inaccurate, and the Texas School Board of Education is actively making things worse.

I can't imagine any other career that I'd like and be good at. It seems to be my calling and purpose in life. But I can't bear the thought of doing a pointless task for a career. I don't want my purpose in life to be itself meaningless. I want to believe that history's useful, but I believe what I think is true and not whatever I want.

So what do you have to say about history's value? Why should it be studied? What are historians good for? Help would be greatly appreciated!

 

[TheLastOne36]

Subscribing post as I feel the same way on a lot of points you bring up.

What jobs do you speak of though? I wasn't even aware there were jobs in the history field besides history teachers, hence the reason I shifted my priorities towards Political Science and Economics in university. A historian is no more of a job than a philosopher is.

 

[Phrossack]

Subscribing post as I feel the same way on a lot of points you bring up.

What jobs do you speak of though? I wasn't even aware there were jobs in the history field besides history teachers, hence the reason I shifted my priorities towards Political Science and Economics in university. A historian is no more of a job than a philosopher is.

Well, history professors, high school history teachers, museum curators, that sort of thing. There might not be many different jobs, but there are a lot of people in that field.

 

[innonimatu]

I'm one of those who considered history as an interesting career but decided it wasn't worth it. Can I still make a defense of history?

What the hell, I'll try to make it anyway!

the job of history professor, and the whole subject of history itself, is mostly (not completely, but mostly) irrelevant to society.

The main defense of their profession put forth by historians is that we learn history to prevent repeating the mistakes of the past. Of course, the hole in this argument is that every situation is different. I can't come up with any good examples at the moment, but I know that at least some of you understand what I'm saying because this forum is where I got that idea.

True. But while every situation is different, there is such a thing as experience. And such a thing as second-hand experience. That's why education has any value. History provides a lot of education, a lot of second-hand experience, on a wide range of topics.

You might as well question the importance of learning about current affairs that do not impact on you personally and immediately. Any education that you do not immediately need. I think you understand where I'm going...

History used to be (say, until the specialization during the past century?) about lists of facts on the one hand, and highly speculative opinions on the other. And the way it was used was kind of like with laws and literature, a badge to distinguish scholars and (later) gentlemen, who knew about it, from the "common people". Nor very useful, right? Wrong! Knowing about that history was part of shared culture of the group and thus had a practical value in that knowing about them one got to know about the other people with similar interests (or similar "badges") thought! They knew and quoted the same historical works, they considered the same second-hand experience when trying to solve their contemporary problems... so knowing about history was useful for all the members of the "learned classes", who were almost always the ruling classes.
Now, you can question the social contribution of history during that period, seeing as it was used only by a bunch of self-deluded twits - but are not all ruling classes seen as such by later generations... of historians? The self-delusions and kind of unavoidable, at least let them be built as much on top of real human experiences as possible instead of mystical crap! History, even badly done history, was probably a good thing.

It seems to me, then, that the one of the only reasons to study history is because it's interesting. Well, lots of things are interesting. Ancient and medieval weapons technology, in my case. But that subject is almost totally worthless.

And how is history used now? There has been one great modification in the contemporary world: the "learned classes" came to comprise most of the population. To varying degrees, sure, but it was always so among those literate, was it not?

This had some interesting consequences. One is that "knowing your history" as a badge was devalued as a shared group experience. Knowing anything in general was devalued. People must specialize to become members of groups. And history, as well as many other learned topics, became specialized. For better and for worse. Within each specialty, though, it still continues to serve it's... elitist purpose of proving shared references for groups of people, of allowing insight into the ideas of others shaped by the same understandings of (some specific area of) history. The huge quantity of political and current affairs books trying to invoke "historical arguments" stands as a proof of that. And of continuing "twitness" too...

So the personal value of history continues to exist, beyond simple appreciation of good stories. Whether one wants to make a career in an area where it can be more easily leveraged on, or not, it's a matter of choice and/or opportunity....
What about the social interest of history? I can only say, in its defense, the same I said about the past social value of history: it's probably better than using fiction.

 

[ELITEOFWARMAN8]

Thanks for making this thread. I agree. In my opinion..... Some history is important. War, genocide, don't do this stuff again etc... or other stuff like a polio vaccine etc.... but otherwise.. .Who cares about the 1st made travel wagon that was used to travel out west in the US? I sure don't. Or the first fancy sword made by knights? Who cares?

 

[Agent327]

Probably. (O wait, what am I saying...)

 

[King Kalmah]

Umm yeah lets forget the lessons we learned all these years and start from scratch...

That might work if this was Fallout or Escape from New York..but its the real world...

History is alot like having a profile...sure nations change and kingdoms fall,but the people rarely change....

I think history is useful since with out it we'd be lost in the woods without a compass...

Thanks for making this thread. I agree. In my opinion..... Some history is important. War, genocide, don't do this stuff again etc... or other stuff like a polio vaccine etc.... but otherwise.. .Who cares about the 1st made travel wagon that was used to travel out west in the US? I sure don't. Or the first fancy sword made by knights? Who cares?

This right here sums up my point...

I bet a lot of money your future descendents will say similar things to our Generation's accomplishments...

who cares about the first computer?(Ipod)

who cars about the first Rocketship?(Solar powered car/green tech)

Who cars about the first flight?(space tourism)

If that is the attitude of tomorrow then I want to die today...progress cannot be made unless you look back and see where you are coming from...no green/high tech cars without the Model T...you see what I am getting at?

Remember how certain shields in Asia were woven together from fiber back in the 1200s?

Well they re-discovered this and thats why we have bullet proof vests and other great armor...without History there would be no bullet proof vest!!!!

You wouldn't put a kid into a job market without some training and a nation without history(like Isolationist USA...20s) is blind deaf and dumb in that respect...

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Why does society, or at least parts of it, deem the study of history to be worthwhile enough to pay people to do it? I think it's ridiculous that actors and sports players make millions, but at least they're popular and in demand. They, at least, can entertain people. What are historians good for?

Let me state that I know we have to know at least some history, particularly that of the last century or two. Otherwise, it would be impossible to understand things like modern Islamic fundamentalism, women's rights, and a host of other things. But do we really need hundreds of thousands of historians publishing millions of books, documentaries, articles, and silly little research articles with such a narrow, obscure, academic, and insignificant focus that only a handful of highly specialized other historians will ever read them?
...
But I'm deeply worried that the only job that I'd both maybe like and maybe be good at is useless to society.
...
I can't imagine any other career that I'd like and be good at. It seems to be my calling and purpose in life. But I can't bear the thought of doing a pointless task for a career. I don't want my purpose in life to be itself meaningless. I want to believe that history's useful, but I believe what I think is true and not whatever I want.
...
So what do you have to say about history's value? Why should it be studied? What are historians good for? Help would be greatly appreciated!

My current TV obsession is The Borgias. Yes, I know the producers and writers have taken incredible liberties with historical accuracy.

But without all the people who bothered to write down the history in written form and artistic forms (paintings and sculptures), I wouldn't know that the TV show was playing fast and loose for the sake of entertainment, would I?

History is never useless. Think of the standing and prestige accorded to the tribal elders and lorekeepers in prehistoric and later ancient societies. Without these people, societies and culture in general wouldn't have advanced a fraction as much as it did. It doesn't matter if the history is drawn on cave walls, carved into a temple, or written on paper or electronic media - historians are the "rememberers" of society, and if nobody ever bothered to record what happened, we'd be in pretty bad shape culturally and many other ways.

If history is your calling, go for it.

 

[SeekTruthFromFacts]

When I was 7, my school teacher asked me what I wanted to be. I said I wanted to be a professor of history.

It's worth studying and writing about history because these are the lives of men and women made in the image of God. Each of them made decisions that either gave glory to, or dishonoured their Maker. Each of them was unique, and their choices (and the way they accepted, rejected, revelled in or despaired at the aspects of their life that they could not choose) are worth considering. They have dignity in themselves, and so do their records. Furthermore, with hesitation and humility, we will sometimes wonder if we can trace the hand of God working through history, and wonder at the majesty and awesomeness of his ways. It's a worthwhile way to spend your life.

From a Christian perspective, it's easy to justify history on an absolute level. It gets a little more difficult if you set it against the claims of souls and bodies in need.

 

[Traitorfish]

History is as useful if you make it. If you treat it as nothing more than the accumulation of trivia, then, yes, it's fairly pointless, but if you take it as one aspect of an over-arching anthropological project, then it's quite vital.

 

[Phrossack]

True. But while every situation is different, there is such a thing as experience. And such a thing as second-hand experience. That's why education has any value. History provides a lot of education, a lot of second-hand experience, on a wide range of topics.

That's a valid point.

History used to be (say, until the specialization during the past century?) about lists of facts on the one hand, and highly speculative opinions on the other. And the way it was used was kind of like with laws and literature, a badge to distinguish scholars and (later) gentlemen, who knew about it, from the "common people". Nor very useful, right? Wrong! Knowing about that history was part of shared culture of the group and thus had a practical value in that knowing about them one got to know about the other people with similar interests (or similar "badges") thought! They knew and quoted the same historical works, they considered the same second-hand experience when trying to solve their contemporary problems... so knowing about history was useful for all the members of the "learned classes", who were almost always the ruling classes.

So it's useful because it enables elites to smugly distinguish themselves from the masses? I don't get what you're saying here.

Spoiler :

Umm yeah lets forget the lessons we learned all these years and start from scratch...

That might work if this was Fallout or Escape from New York..but its the real world...

History is alot like having a profile...sure nations change and kingdoms fall,but the people rarely change....

I think history is useful since with out it we'd be lost in the woods without a compass...



This right here sums up my point...

I bet a lot of money your future descendents will say similar things to our Generation's accomplishments...

who cares about the first computer?(Ipod)

who cars about the first Rocketship?(Solar powered car/green tech)

Who cars about the first flight?(space tourism)

If that is the attitude of tomorrow then I want to die today...progress cannot be made unless you look back and see where you are coming from...no green/high tech cars without the Model T...you see what I am getting at?

Remember how certain shields in Asia were woven together from fiber back in the 1200s?

Well they re-discovered this and thats why we have bullet proof vests and other great armor...without History there would be no bullet proof vest!!!!

You wouldn't put a kid into a job market without some training and a nation without history(like Isolationist USA...20s) is blind deaf and dumb in that respect...

In my OP, I specifically stated that

Let me state that I know we have to know at least some history, particularly that of the last century or two. Otherwise, it would be impossible to understand things like modern Islamic fundamentalism, women's rights, and a host of other things.

My current TV obsession is The Borgias. Yes, I know the producers and writers have taken incredible liberties with historical accuracy.

But without all the people who bothered to write down the history in written form and artistic forms (paintings and sculptures), I wouldn't know that the TV show was playing fast and loose for the sake of entertainment, would I?

History is never useless. Think of the standing and prestige accorded to the tribal elders and lorekeepers in prehistoric and later ancient societies. Without these people, societies and culture in general wouldn't have advanced a fraction as much as it did. It doesn't matter if the history is drawn on cave walls, carved into a temple, or written on paper or electronic media - historians are the "rememberers" of society, and if nobody ever bothered to record what happened, we'd be in pretty bad shape culturally and many other ways.

If history is your calling, go for it.

Are you saying that history is useful because it's entertaining? I don't think you are. But again, I think we should have some idea of the past two or so centuries of history.

Spoiler :

When I was 7, my school teacher asked me what I wanted to be. I said I wanted to be a professor of history.

It's worth studying and writing about history because these are the lives of men and women made in the image of God. Each of them made decisions that either gave glory to, or dishonoured their Maker. Each of them was unique, and their choices (and the way they accepted, rejected, revelled in or despaired at the aspects of their life that they could not choose) are worth considering. They have dignity in themselves, and so do their records. Furthermore, with hesitation and humility, we will sometimes wonder if we can trace the hand of God working through history, and wonder at the majesty and awesomeness of his ways. It's a worthwhile way to spend your life.

From a Christian perspective, it's easy to justify history on an absolute level. It gets a little more difficult if you set it against the claims of souls and bodies in need.

I'm an atheist.

 

[TheLastOne36]

This thread made me do some google searching and I came across this link: http://www.library.csi.cuny.edu/dept/history/major.html

Which raises some pretty interesting points and perspectives that I personally did not previously think of regarding why studying history is useful.

 

[Plotinus]

You think being a historian is useless? I'm a philosopher. I win.

Personally I would be inclined to agree with you. Yes, being a historian probably is useless from society's point of view. So are most of the humanities, if not all. So indeed are a fair few of the sciences (what's the point of palaeontologists?). But so what? You're asking this question on a gaming forum. Pretty much by definition, all of us here enjoy pursuits that are completely useless. So does almost everyone. Not everything has a use or should have a use.

Many would disagree, but I think knowledge for its own sake is valuable, even where it's not useful. That's why the humanities matter, not because of any supposed use they may be.

If you really have a passion to be a historian, then you should go for it (bearing in mind that academic study of the humanities at the postgraduate level is quite possibly the worst career move anyone could make at the moment, believe me). But I don't think you should base your decision on whether to do that on whether it's a useful profession or not. Arguably almost no careers are really useful unless you're in construction or agriculture or textiles; everything else is luxuries. The difference between civilisation and a lack thereof is how many resources can go on the non-essentials.

 

[Azale]

Learning how to write and do rigorous research via your interest in history suddenly gives it much more utility.

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

I'm a junior in high school and have a passion for history. For a while I wanted to be a history professor, but now I've changed my mind as it's hard to get a job in that field and going into something like law, however, I still enjoy history. I, too, have pondered this before, as I have a bookshelf full of diverse history books in my room, which I read often. I've heard it said that we need to know our past to be able to understand our present, I wonder what CFC thinks of this?

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

what's the point of palaeontologists?

Outlining the principle of evolution. Kind of important to biology.

As for the OP's question, doesn't history grant some insights into politics, economics, and other fields concerning human interaction? It's sort of a fossil record for those subjects, so to speak.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Outlining the principle of evolution. Kind of important to biology.

That would be an evolutionary biologist.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Are you saying that history is useful because it's entertaining? I don't think you are. But again, I think we should have some idea of the past two or so centuries of history.

I was addressing this portion of your post:

Why does society, or at least parts of it, deem the study of history to be worthwhile enough to pay people to do it? I think it's ridiculous that actors and sports players make millions, but at least they're popular and in demand. They, at least, can entertain people. What are historians good for?

Without historians recording historical events (which to many of them would be their equivalent of current events), the people in the entertainment industry who want to make historical-themed TV shows, movies, and documentaries wouldn't have any source material to work from. Even centuries ago, Shakespeare needed some historical knowledge to write his plays. For that matter, Homer couldn't have composed the Iliad without knowing something of history.

And yes, I do find history entertaining beyond what I watch on TV or the Kenneth Branagh movies I enjoyed, or the Shakespeare plays I'd see at the local theatre, or the documentaries I watch. I majored in anthropology in college, minored in geography, and took classical history purely for enjoyment. I spent 12 years in the Society for Creative Anachronism, and it's nearly impossible to spend that many years in the SCA without learning medieval/Renaissance history and how to re-create many of the aspects of daily life during those centuries.

Becoming a historian is not useless unless you literally cannot imagine a way to use the knowledge/skills you learn to make some sort of living. You can teach, write non-fiction books, write historical fiction, go into some other aspect of the entertainment industry, or a host of other possibilities.

History ties us to our own past (as does paleontology, btw; we have some of the finest dinosaur fossil beds in the world in my province).

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

That would be an evolutionary biologist.

And the samples they study are dug up by?

 

[Dachs]

For that matter, Homer couldn't have composed the Iliad without knowing something of history.

Homer probably wasn't a single person, and the events in the Iliad are mythical and don't match up well with historical evidence at all. There are many anachronistic references as well.

So "Homer" probably could've composed the Iliad without knowing something of history.