University Writing Instructor: Richard Baker Brandon University Hongbo Sun 101289 July 24, 2011
Abstract This research paper discusses the history books tell the truth, meaning the actual what, when, where, why, how, and who of a past event is biased. People always put their own biases in every aspect of collecting data and presenting it. History books are unable to tell the truth because they are usually connected with a philosophical explanation of why an event happened. This paper run though the various factors involved in the writing of a history book and tell the history book can not tell truth.
Introduction “Everyone has the right to his opinion. A person has also the right to be wrong. But a textbook has no right to be wrong; or to evade the truth, falsity history, or insult and malign a whole race of people. That is what the textbook do” (Henry, 1970) It is different to write a general book and a history book. A general book can be fiction, but a history book must tell the truth. The question is, can history book really tell the truth? The answer is no. It is no such thing as an unbiased book. Every communication expresses the views of individuals making them. In the case of books, those views are fixed in aspic for all who dip at any time in the future into that particular confection. (Klein, 2002) Every one has a unique viewpoint which he subconsciously brings to bear on all incoming sensory material; totally objectivity is just not possible for anyone. History book are inherently biased because of the personal influence and interpretation of historians. Historians put their own biases in every aspect of collecting data and presenting it. All of the material would be part fact, part inference, part judgment, and part