On his first day of class, probably in the second phase of elementary school, a history teacher came into the room to discuss the importance of studying this subject. Such a discussion is undoubtedly important. After all, the questions and ways of investigating the past in this new phase of teaching become more complex and you, as an individual in training, he is already tempted to raise some deeper questions about what happened in the past.
We know that many out there have learned that history is important so that we don't make the same mistakes of the past, so that we have the opportunity to organize the now and the future in a more safe. From such a perspective, the study of faits accomplis would have strategic value. In other words, this idea suggests that the analysis and critique of the past determine the achievement of a future free from the ills that once afflicted us.
In fact, looking at this kind of use for the past, we are tempted to romanticize history as an indispensable tool for progress. However, is it even correct to say that an understanding of the past truly guarantees a better society or civilization? If that were so, all the ill that World War I brought to Europe would instill the “lesson” that World War II shouldn't happen. But that's not quite how things turned out, is it?
Realizing this kind of inconsistency is that we have the chance to intuit that History does not have this saving mission of warning man about the mistakes he cannot make again. In fact, before believing that societies and civilizations have already made the same mistake twice, we must understand that these men who are objects of study of the past do not think, feel, believe or dream the same way through the days, years, decades, centuries and millennia.
Do not stop now... There's more after the advertising ;)
Therefore, the notion of progress attributed to History must be abandoned in favor of an investigation of values, of relations social, conflicts and other traces that show us the transience and mutation of the contexts in which historical facts are consummated. It is in this way that we come to understand that the man and the societies that struggled and suffered in World War I are not quite the same ones that emerged on the scene of World War II.
Having made this reflection, we should not reach the point of thinking that the contexts and periods in which History takes place are radically different from each other. From one time to another, we can notice that societies do not abandon their old way of acting to incorporate a completely innovative posture. In each period it is necessary to recognize the continuities and discontinuities that show the strength that the past had as an important reference in the formation of individuals and collectivities.
When making these notes, we should not believe that the past is nothing more than a chaotic game controlled by players (in this case, men) who do not know how to define their own rules. Before that, it's much more interesting to note that this game has multiple features and that the shapes of recognize the nature of your rules can change according to the way we look at the past.
Thus, the investigation of the past turns into a great debate in which each person interested has the opportunity to show unprecedented wealth on the same topic. As this happens, not only do we have a chance to think about what man has already done, but we also have a way. curious, even if it is the complete difference, to debate our values and question the now with the "eyes" of our ancestors.
By Rainer Sousa
Master in History
Would you like to reference this text in a school or academic work? Look:
SOUSA, Rainer Gonçalves. "After all, what is history for?"; Brazil School. Available in: https://brasilescola.uol.com.br/historia/afinal-para-que-serve-historia.htm. Accessed on June 27, 2021.