Tok Essay

1553 Words Nov 18th, 2013 7 Pages
“The historian’s 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 of knowledge?

Colegio Franklin Delano Roosevelt
November 13 2013
May 2014 Exam Session
Word Count: 1600

Humans have come to accept that History by mere definition is the exploration and study of history whereas the Human Sciences are defined as the in depth study of social, biological and cultural aspects of human beings. As humans we have used and accepted this two Areas of Knowledge, to interpret and understand the world around us. History and Human Sciences seek to influence humans through language, reason, and emotion. An assumption is made here that
…show more content…
Since our knowledge is primarily based on intuitions and assumptions as to what a person’s behavior is going to be5, it can then be inferred by historians what will happen in the future.
Although historians seek for evidence to substantiate their facts, there are times were no physical evidence is found therefore they discard their evidence as merely a myth or relate it to other accounts who share a similar believe. Nonetheless historians, who fail to seek into the past to substantiate their viewpoint, don’t necessarily neglect the idea of using the evidence found to better the future. When a historian is successful at achieving his goal and writes a successful review on a historical event it is then when he reasons as to whether the information can be applied to the future to make an improvement or if it should be discarded as another piece of evidence of our history’s past.
On similar concept, Human Sciences also study the past to try and change the future. Anthropology as a branch of this AOK cultural anthropology6 studies the cultural and social variation among the different communities and races in the world. Back in the past there was a misconception as to what cultural anthropology studied.