Issue: “The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten.“
========================================================================


Comment by Bishulily:

Before we set off to discuss this issue, it is important to understand how far that the study of history has already been. Let us begin in the realm of history by underscoring how far we are now removed from the days that historians were primarily concerned with recording or glorifying the deeds of rulers, politics actors, and famous people. They significantly assigned praise and blame to these people depending on their apparent success and failure in the history being told. Many “official story” stored in the archives and annals are concerned about those who claimed authority over the lives of ordinary people. However, with a thoughtful analysis and close attention the history, we realize how limited the emphasis on the deeds of individuals actually was.

History can not be understood in terms of actions of individuals. It is fundamentally mistaken, to assume that the history is created by individuals. For example, pyramids of evidence showed the differences of the development of industry among different countries. In some European countries such as England, industry revolution happened much earlier than did some Asian countries such as China. The divergent paths of development were related to both the political and economical reasons in those societies. It is the gross effect of the whole society formed different social styles. These socioeconomic and politic-cultural motivations behind the development of industry were directly linked to the efforts of groups of people.

We can not isolate the actions of individuals from efforts of groups of people when viewing history. Any individuals, who were regarded by historians as the one creating history, could not successful without the supports from groups of people. There is a Chinese euphemism, “a general is standing on millions of bones”, can be used to analogue this situation. A general is impossible to win a war by his single action. Without the struggling of soldiers, a general can do nothing with the war, whichever abilities he has.

Placing too much emphasis on individuals, the study of history is fragmental and misleading. This method can create a situation that misleads people to focus more on historical individuals, attribute hastily the history events to the influence of individuals, and comment history by biased views. With such views, people forget that history is the combined effect of groups of people and individuals. With such views, people comment the individuals with carp even unfair eyes. This kind of view can be exaggerated under some conditions if not corrected in time, and sometimes results in very serious consequences that influence the stableness of the society. A part of Chinese revolutionary history illustrated this point. Even nowadays, there are still many people in China have very confused and absurd views of historical characters in recent history of China.

The study of history should explore the interface of history and politics, economy and culture of the society, identifying the faces of individuals within the efforts of groups in terms of the meanings of the collective actions of normal people. The challenge for the next generation of research is, as I see it, to link the more fragmented histories of individuals’ action with the newer accounts of varied development in ways that allow us to see the extent to which ordinary people were capable of shaping their own history.

离离MM是学文的高材生吧

：：离离MM是学文的高材生吧
============================

答错。扣10分。

物理是我的正宗本科。
大三偏向电子技术。

又来了一个使“双枪”的

::又来了一个使“双枪”的
===============================

我是不务正业。

中国历史学绝对是个造假重灾区。
国家花了上千万搞夏商周断代工程，结果只搞到商。据说又想搞什么大曙光工程，非断出个夏不可。
你怎么知道有夏朝，万一没有呢？花多少钱算完。
还有什么四大发明，史记，全吹牛。
去看一下搞历史人做的所谓证明，你就知道什么叫文科了。