Scribd
Upload
154 views2 pages

Philippine History Controversies (25 Points) INSTRUCTIONS: Read The Questions Carefully Before Answering Briefly. Do Not Add

The document discusses the process of multiperspectivity in historical interpretation. It provides explanations for three statements related to historical interpretation. For the first statement on multiperspectivity, it explains that multiperspectivity refers to presenting multiple co-existing perspectives on a historical topic or issue from different actors who may have had conflicting views. For the second statement, it disagrees that historical interpretation is based on a historian's judgment of how the past should be seen, arguing instead that it is based on a historian's understanding of what occurred in the past. For the third statement, it agrees that we make sense of the past through historical interpretation, as there are no absolute historical facts and historians' own

Uploaded by

Vhon Misaki
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
154 views2 pages

Philippine History Controversies (25 Points) INSTRUCTIONS: Read The Questions Carefully Before Answering Briefly. Do Not Add

The document discusses the process of multiperspectivity in historical interpretation. It provides explanations for three statements related to historical interpretation. For the first statement on multiperspectivity, it explains that multiperspectivity refers to presenting multiple co-existing perspectives on a historical topic or issue from different actors who may have had conflicting views. For the second statement, it disagrees that historical interpretation is based on a historian's judgment of how the past should be seen, arguing instead that it is based on a historian's understanding of what occurred in the past. For the third statement, it agrees that we make sense of the past through historical interpretation, as there are no absolute historical facts and historians' own

Uploaded by

Vhon Misaki
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Philippine History Controversies (25 points)

INSTRUCTIONS: Read the questions carefully before answering briefly. Do not add
your own facts; provide only what is being asked. A mere yes or no answer without
explanation will not be credited.

1. Explain the process of Multiperspectivity. (10pts.)


Parallel or synchronic contemporaneous multiperspective is referred to as "in the past."
Its primary educational role is to educate students about various topics' points of view, and its
primary educational function is to teach students about various subjects' points of view. Different
historical actors may have had conflicting opinions on the same issue. a thing shaped by a
variety of experiences, ideas, and ideologies
In conclusion, the process is based on how multiple perspectives are narrated or
presented to the audience. Furthermore, it does not only focus on the main idea but also to the
co-existing perspective that is applicable during the process because it may or may not contain
different objectives, ideas, and beliefs.

2. Explain why you agree or disagree with the following statements: (5 pts. each)
a. Historical interpretation is based on the historian’s judgment on how the
past should be seen.
I disagree with the statement because Historical interpretation is most likely
based on the Historian’s understanding of what is history was all about. The statement
shows dictatorship regarding how should people understand or foresee Historical
events. Historical interpretation is basically the interpretation of historical events based
on the Historians comprehension. To paraphrase the statement, it should be “Historical
interpretation is based on the historian’s understanding of what is happening in the
past”. Because historians have different perspectives, ideologies, and interpretations
they most likely also argue and most likely cause narrative bias among other
interpretations.

b. We make sense of the past through historical interpretation.


There isn't much that can be labeled historical fact, I agree. Archaeologists
provide some of the information, but the writers' interpretations have already been
sorted via the written information. Then there's the matter of historians' personal beliefs,
which often make their way into their writings. This has an impact on their
interpretations This is not an indictment of history, but rather a description of it. That’s
why I agree with the statement above. Because of some broad narrative me seek to
clarify things that are more simple and that may be able to have the same opinion with
us.

c. Multiperspectivity is a quality of historical writing attributed to a variety of lenses that


may be used to view the past.
Multiple viewpoints, in my opinion, are related to the epistemological assumption
that history is interpretative and subjective. Rather than being objectively presented as a
single "closed" narrative, the study's several sources are coexisting narratives of distinct
historical occurrences. Original content from many views on historical events should be
used in a Multiperspective. There is an ideology that says “The more evidence, the
more reliable it is”

You might also like