- Joined
- Jul 20, 2011
- Messages
- 60,915
- Reaction score
- 46,566
How am I wrong there?<{CMPALM}><{cruzshake}>
How am I wrong there?<{CMPALM}><{cruzshake}>
You never tell a career student he didnt need to sell his soul to the university, brother. That was your mistake.How am I wrong there?
How am I wrong there?
Well in my defense I did say that there was something to be gained through the experience.You never tell a career student he didnt need to sell his soul to the university, brother. That was your mistake.
No for real, I want to know because that is how I see it and if I am wrong then I want to be corrected. To be clear I am talking about the undergrad level mostly, I'm sure past that things can be different.
Speaking of her she is another woman with a strong jawline that I find beautiful.I agree with these guys. Also, Salma Hayek is close to GOAT status imo.
Aspect of a fan theory that's worth maybe talking about. Arya's brown eyes (Freys imo), blues eyes (clearly night king) and the yet to be green eyes....
Both Emilia Clarke and Lena Hedey have green eyes. And the show isn't using purple contacts for the targaryens like they initially tried.
The process of being trained to interpret the past is fundamentally collaborative. It's a never ending exchange of interpretations. It's functionally impossible to replicate effectively outside of an education. I think people have an enormous misunderstanding of what historians actually do. It's not a matter of just sitting down and memorizing material; you're being taught how to expand that material. Furthermore (as I mentioned to someone else here) i'm a public historian. This means that my work is made for and with non-academic audiences. It is not typically possible to do what I do in any self-taught capacity, or at least not well. I've been brought late game into oral history projects that lacked anyone with specific training and.... they are a shit show.No for real, I want to know because that is how I see it and if I am wrong then I want to be corrected. To be clear I am talking about the undergrad level mostly, I'm sure past that things can be different.
I don't see how most of that is impossible outside of an education. Certainly difficult because one would need a decent chunk of time, money, and discipline to do it but impossible? I know historians aren't just memorizing history but I don't see how that contradicts what I said. Aren't there books on historiography? Aren't there historical journals I could pay for access to that would presumably display the never ending exchange of different interpretations? Do I need a history degree to access historical archives or attend history conferences? And something like H-Net has a ton of resources that would be useful for amateur students of the humanities and social sciences for instance.The process of being trained to interpret the past is fundamentally collaborative. It's a never ending exchange of interpretations. It's functionally impossible to replicate effectively outside of an education. I think people have an enormous misunderstanding of what historians actually do. It's not a matter of just sitting down and memorizing material; you're being taught how to expand that material. Furthermore (as I mentioned to someone else here) i'm a public historian. This means that my work is made for and with non-academic audiences. It is not typically possible to do what I do in any self-taught capacity, or at least not well. I've been brought late game into oral history projects that lacked anyone with specific training and.... they are a shit show.