{"id":4634,"date":"2023-01-15T16:53:33","date_gmt":"2023-01-15T16:53:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.dickinson.edu\/hist-204pinsker\/?page_id=4634"},"modified":"2025-02-03T17:51:36","modified_gmt":"2025-02-03T17:51:36","slug":"getting-started","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/blogs.dickinson.edu\/hist-204pinsker\/course-syllabus\/getting-started\/","title":{"rendered":"Getting Started"},"content":{"rendered":"

“Everything has a history.” —James Grossman, AHA Perspectives<\/em>, 2015<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

 <\/p>\n

Essential Question<\/h2>\n

What is the right way to frame a good historical question?<\/p>\n

\n

Discussion Questions<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  • What did historian Kenneth Jackson mean when he told his students (like Zachary Schrag), “You can find an example of anything.”<\/li>\n
  • Why does Schrag prefer to think about historical interpretations in terms of dialectics?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
    \n

    “The more puzzling the riddle, the greater the value in its solution.\u00a0 To demonstrate such value, historians often frame their theses as dialectics.\u00a0\u00a0Dialectic\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>is a Greek term, literally meaning ‘conversation.’\u00a0 In philosophy, the term describes the process by which thinkers seek the truth by exchanging opposing arguments.\u00a0 Historians use such comparisons of opposites to craft arguments about the past.\u00a0 Indeed, dialectics distinguish mere recitation of facts from interpretive claims about the past.\u00a0 A dialectic is more than a simple assertion that two ideas, events, or statements were\u00a0different<\/strong>:\u00a0\u00a0<\/em>the word\u00a0different\u00a0<\/em>and its synonyms –diverse, varied, and so on– is too vague.\u00a0 Instead, historians present several distinct types of dialectics to explain debates and the struggles of the past.” –Schrag, p. 57<\/p>\n

      \n
    • Schrag’s list:\u00a0 Opposing forces, internal contradictions,\u00a0 competing priorities, determining factors, hidden meanings, BEFORE AND AFTER<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      Also…<\/p>\n

        \n
      • Socratic Method (Platonic dialogues)<\/li>\n
      • Hegelian dialectic (thesis-antithesis-synthesis)<\/li>\n
      • Marxist class struggle (dialectical materialism)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
        \n

        Framing Questions About the Atomic Bomb<\/h2>\n

        A more recent example of this sort of comparison is the ongoing debate over the decision to use the atomic bomb against Japan.\u00a0 How much were President Truman and other policy makers influenced by the desire to hasten the end of fighting with Japan, compared to their hopes of limiting postwar Soviet power, or their assumption that any weapon, once developed, should be used?\u00a0 Without denying that Truman could have –and likely did– act in response to multiple concerns, scholars weight these factor in various ways, producing a lively debate. –Schrag on “Determining Factors” and Dialectics, Chapter 3<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

        Hollywood and the Manhattan Project<\/strong><\/p>\n

        Behind-the-scenes with Christopher Nolan\u2019s \u201cOppenheimer\u201d movie (2023), based on the 2005 Pulitzer Prize-winning biography of physicist and Manhattan Project director J. Robert Oppenheimer by Kai Bird and Martin Sherwin<\/p>\n