“the historians task is to understand the past; the human scientist, by contrast, is looking to change the future.” To what extent is this true in these areas on knowledge?

1011 Words5 Pages
Logan Falco 11/22/13 TOK Prescribed Title “the historians task is to understand the past; the human scientist, by contrast, is looking to change the future.” To what extent is this true in these areas on knowledge? Life is too short for any individual to make every mistake. We use history to learn where we come from and what the caused events of the past to happen. There must be a strong in depth understanding of what causes events such as the renaissance all the way to World War Two. Creating a strong understanding of the past helps form a guide to make the future better. Human sciences seek the functionality of the human mind in order to reason why people act the way they do. These scientists find ways the mind works in order to…show more content…
The studies of mental states by human scientist can benefit historians understanding incredibly in their mission to find the causes of events. The events that occur would also help the scientist find what the mental outcomes are for the populist. These two areas of knowledge not only seek the same goal but are also complimentary to one another. They are both encompassed within the overall study of how civilization works and in turn how to improve the future from that knowledge. While history is a part of the past us studying what has happened helps us prevent the bad again and replicate the good, both to improve the future for everyone. Human sciences on the other hand study our mind and those of the past. These two areas of knowledge seem incredibly different at first glance but are hugely intertwined when looked into deeply. Seeking the objective to help society learn for the future by how people act and have acted. These areas of knowledge also give and take information from one another. Historians understand why Hitler built up so much hate by understanding what emotional trauma had been done to him before. The human scientist benefits from history by looking at mean child and seeing that he had been raised in a poor nation due to wars and poverty over thousands of years. While the historian is

    More about “the historians task is to understand the past; the human scientist, by contrast, is looking to change the future.” To what extent is this true in these areas on knowledge?

      Open Document