Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!ucbcad!nike!lll-crg!seismo!rochester!cornell!batcomputer!cheryl
From: cheryl@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU (cheryl)
Newsgroups: soc.college,talk.rumors
Subject: Re: Accuracy in Academia
Message-ID: <1165@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU>
Date: Sun, 5-Oct-86 15:57:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: batcompu.1165
Posted: Sun Oct  5 15:57:43 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 8-Oct-86 03:49:06 EDT
References: <15485@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <15492@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: cheryl@batcomputer.UUCP (cheryl)
Distribution: na
Organization: Theory Center, Cornell University, Ithaca NY
Lines: 50
Xref: ucbvax soc.college:61 talk.rumors:91

In article <5211@dartvax.UUCP> chelsea@dartvax.UUCP (Karen Christenson) writes:
>
>>>     Any course on early modern Europe that doesn't cover the Protestant
>>>Reformation has got one huge, gaping hole.  This is not just dogma, this is
>>>a matter of strong historical influence.  For instance, without knowing
>>>about the Protestant Reformation, you can't really understand the settlement
>>>of New England and many of the ideas that we have inherited from the first
>>>settlers, like the concept of the "City on the Hill."
>>>						Karen Christenson
>>
>>And you can get most of THAT out of your average HIGH SCHOOL TEXTBOOK
>>on modern european history.  You can even get it in a more concise and
>>clear form out of the great works of Mr. Monarch and Mr Barron, who 
>>are regularly plagiarized by much worse authors.  It's mostly harmless, 
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>although a little knowlege is a dangerous thing.  Have an adequate education.
>>
>>Cheryl Stewart
>
>     History out of Monarch, Barron, and high school texts?  Adequate
>knowledge of previous events, but not much history.  If you think of history
>as a set of particulars, then it's fine.  If you're interested in the princi-
>ples, the interrelations, the minds and attitudes of the times, then it
>sucks.  I'm not sure what your point is.  Are you suggesting that high
>school history is enough?  

No, I'm suggesting that the understanding of hisory you seem to advocate
in your original posting is at about high school level.  

>     Me, I have no real interest in anything after the Civil War.  My own
>fascination is with the period starting with the Renaissance - watching
>all these new ideas come to light, get kicked around, carried off to a new
>world, kicked around some more, and sent back to Europe.  Watching the
>US take shape and fight to get the rest of the world to accept it at its
>own valuation.  So I can't like the idea of history as merely a chronicle
>of events and dates and names.  Besides, it's so much more boring that way.
>No wonder so many high school kids hate history.
>						Karen Christenson
>"Mostly harmless."				...!dartvax!chelsea
>			Have an adequate day.

Oh, you think it was IDEAS that shaped the American Revolution and the
drafting of the constitution.  *RENAISSANCE* IDEAS at that!  This is
an interesting theory of yours, Karen.  Please do compare and contrast
your theory with those of DeToqueville and Schlesinger for the rest of
the class, Karen.  

That's what *we* covered in High School.  

Cheryl