First and foremost, most historical truths are subjective due to the biased' approach the historian takes when selecting sources to interpret historical events. Given the fact that the modern historian has access to numerous sources, there is the tendency for him to only select sources which echo his personal prejudices' on the historical event concerned. This is because, due to the huge quantity of sources available, the historian will never be able to use all the sources for his interpretations of historical events. Thus, since he is in a position where he cannot use all sources (which have different interpretations for the same historical event), the historian would find it convenient to use sources which go along with his personal prejudices'. For example, due to the large number of sources available on the Nanking massacres, many modern Chinese historians, unable to use each and every source (due to the various forms of interpretations presented by these sources), tend to only select sources which claim that the massacres took place. This is because, these historians are prejudiced' against the Japanese... [continues]
Cite This Essay
(2006, 11). Objectivity and Subjectivity in History. StudyMode.com. Retrieved 11, 2006, from http://www.studymode.com/essays/Objectivity-And-Subjectivity-In-History-100335.html
"Objectivity and Subjectivity in History" StudyMode.com. 11 2006. 2006. 11 2006 <http://www.studymode.com/essays/Objectivity-And-Subjectivity-In-History-100335.html>.
- MLA 7
"Objectivity and Subjectivity in History." StudyMode.com. StudyMode.com, 11 2006. Web. 11 2006. <http://www.studymode.com/essays/Objectivity-And-Subjectivity-In-History-100335.html>.
"Objectivity and Subjectivity in History." StudyMode.com. 11, 2006. Accessed 11, 2006. http://www.studymode.com/essays/Objectivity-And-Subjectivity-In-History-100335.html.