Scribd
Upload
79 views1 page

MRR Template RIZAL

The document discusses how historians are limited in interpreting history by their own cognition and understanding. Historians can only derive part of the truth from the past as they are not present during that time. Rather than objective truth, history focuses more on the appearance of truth by comparing findings. The document raises questions about determining authenticity of sources and documents, what happens if historians make mistakes, and how lost artifacts could impact society if found.

Uploaded by

Benj Mendoza
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
79 views1 page

MRR Template RIZAL

The document discusses how historians are limited in interpreting history by their own cognition and understanding. Historians can only derive part of the truth from the past as they are not present during that time. Rather than objective truth, history focuses more on the appearance of truth by comparing findings. The document raises questions about determining authenticity of sources and documents, what happens if historians make mistakes, and how lost artifacts could impact society if found.

Uploaded by

Benj Mendoza
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

The Life and Works of Jose Rizal

Metacognitive Reading Report # 1

Title of the Article: _Gottschalk Understanding History and Howell Reliable Source

Name: ___Sy, Darwin Dale R. Date: _June 5, 2021_

1. Three (3) Things that I significantly learned from the readings


Historians that try to interpret the past are limited by their own cognitive since
The past is not present we can only derive a part of the truth. Many of the artifacts
can be faked hence the authenticity of those document are a must. Rather than
objective truth history focuses more on appearance of truth since we are not around
that time historian compare their findings and uses their similarities as a conclusion
of the truth.

2. Three (3) Things that are still unclear to me


What shall determine the authenticity of a document or source. Historians compare
their works to each other what if both of them are incorrect who will correct their
mistake or rather who will validate their findings. And finally, if the historian made
a mistake on finding or interpreting the data incompletely then will this affect their
reputation as a historian or rather only their cognitive.

3. I used to think that….


Historian used original sources then wrote down the ideas the original sources have
but it is far from that, historians are limited to their understanding and so
interpreting the original source may not be as authentic and it is not the lack of
knowledge of teachers discussing the subject matter but rather the lack of
information interpreted of the historian.

4. Three (3) questions that I want to ask about the readings


If the document is made to be fraud in that time, then how will the historian know
whether it is fraud or not. If historians are limited by their understanding, then how will
they convey the idea completely and not fail as a historian. Lost ancient artifacts have
been lost throughout history, if they are found would it affect our society technologically.

You might also like