English

T: Grandpa, I love reading history but I also want to dig out something makes sense in spacetime, do you think I should take history or physics as my major?

A: Do you think history makes sense?

T: Why should history make sense? History is just a tiny part of the things happened before. It comes with more or less of opinions provided by authors or story tellers. We don't need formulas for history so that there is no judgment point in history. How can history make sense? I don't get it.

A: When you select your topics for your paper, will you pick up your target randomly from the whole history?

T: No. I think I need to read more to find my target. I will have to discuss it with my instructor as well, I guess.

A: Then you select for some purpose and with a purpose in your mind the history must make some sense to you if you select it.

T: Why? When I select, I consider if I like to spend my time on that piece of story and if my instructor would agree to it, but the history itself is still objective, isn't it?

A: What is your definition of the objectiveness in history?

T: Well, history might be not very objective before TV era, but from the day people could get live news on, I believe that history has been more and more objective. The purpose people work on archeology is also to dig out the objective history, isn't it?

A: That is a very clear explanation, not bad. How about the text books of history?

T: I, I think you do have a good point there, grandpa. Okay, history may make sense to some professors like You, to be put into text books. I also heard that even the TV news stations are controlled by a few powerful people. However, I think these phenomena are all part of truth. I mean, any story, even an autobiography, will include only part of fact, some opinions, may or may not include intentional change to the fact, and most likely more or less of author's or editor's mistakes regarding the usage of related languages. Then, could we include all of these as part of the objective fact of the past so that history is very objective under that definition? I believe most historians try to keep history as is, even they did put their opinions in their writings.

A: I remember that your answer to this kind of broad question was "I don't know, grandpa, give me the best answer. Please?" in last summer. Now you have your own opinion. Very good. How about tell me which way of dividing history, you like the most, among the history books you have read?

T: Grandpa, you cannot always change topics. I need your input to my question. Here are my related questions: what is your definition of history?

Or, actually, how you get your final definition of history? Do you try to make some formulas out of history? Do you believe in fate? Do you think a belief is the result of reasoning or it is independent of logics? I think there is no formula relative to fate, what do you think?

A: If you like to be a historian you should find all the answers for yourself, right? I was helping you to answer yourself.

T: Everyone knows history is the study of the past. But that is not the definition I asked. I need more detail, especially regarding the objectiveness of history. I need your input about "objective history". You confused me, grandpa.

A: Give me your note book let me draw you a time line then we can link history to your spacetime. That way, you may get your answer by yourself. Look, history is about events on the time line, right?

T: Yes.

A: Now, do you like to look at each event as independent subject or to collect some related events and read them as a story?

T: I know what you meant now. I think I know. Do you mean when a historian looks for stories, the historian works on history subjectively and when the historian looks for event itself, it is objectively? Don't just smile, grandpa. I need your confirmation.

1-1. History

A: You are smarter than most of my students. No wonder your mathematics teacher had to go back school two years ago. How is he doing at class? Getting better?

T: Oh yah. He is the most popular teacher voted by our classmates at the end of last semester. Mathematics is the most important knowledge to human beings, right?

A: That is why I asked you which way of dividing history you like the most. Now you just divided history into two categories.

T: You mean objective history and subjective history?

A: And you try to select mathematics as the most important knowledge. Actually, history itself is knowledge, isn't it?

T: Well, I read a book talking about the history is not for the world or the universe, it is for people only. In zoology, people talked about some evolution of animals or plants but people don't care about the future of plants and other animals. It's 96 years after "The Decline of the West" was published but in the "high school world history" I still see the western portion only. I assume that, important history is part of knowledge but not the whole history. Most details of events or fictional stories should not be considered as part of knowledge. Grandpa, do you think history is knowledge?

A: Depend on how you define knowledge and history. Normally, history is an umbrella term that relates to past events and all kinds of interpretation for information about some selected portion of these events. You may select events relative to science, religion or social life to study history and definitely you may collect the events and expected future for some species of animal if you want it. So, what do you think?

T: I rather put history as information, not knowledge. Before I use some history to create some theory, have some fun or to make some money, that part of history is just materials or data, not part of knowledge, to me. Like the samples of historical events in Spengler's book can be regarded as part of knowledge, but only within that book. They are not knowledge by themselves. I think knowledge depends on usefulness, big or small. Do you like my definition, grandpa?

A: Do you consider Novels like "Harry Potter" or "The Magicians" as part of knowledge to you?

T: Yes. They are interesting and fun to me. They are also useful in communicating with my friends. But they are not part of important knowledge to me. I may take some time to review "The Decline of the West" in the future but most likely I will not read "Harry Potter" again. However, one of my classmates has read "Harry Potter" four times and she told me she was unable to finish "The Decline of the West". I am confused again, grandpa. You are good on confusing me, aren't you?

1-2. Knowledge

A: I am still learning, someday I may be really good on that. Do you know? It is getting harder now, looks like I will not graduate from this project of confusing you. What is the second important knowledge to you?

T: Love is the main content people need to fulfill a life so love is my choice.

A: If the meaning of a life is to love why this is second to your mathematics?

T: Don't know. It just popped out from my intuition when I said it. I think, may be logic is important but the best tool to practice logic is mathematics.

A: Why logic is more important than...