Do you prefer to learn from science or history?

I prefer to learn from science because I like to know WHY things are the way they are. History just simply says "well this is how it's always been."
Updates:
I realize we learn from our previous mistakes. I just like to know WHY it was a mistake.

For example, carbon monoxide is a deadly gas. History tells me that anybody who directly inhaled it for a whole five minutes straight is dead. Science tells me WHY: about the atoms in it and WHAT makes it deadly. (Kind-of a weird example but it's what came into my head lol. It works)
Knowing why it's a mistake is also where technology comes from. Just history by itself could not improve technology, only society and how people get along.

0|2
35110

Most Helpful Guy

  • Science. You can verify with tests.

    You need to separate science and history because I think you have confused them both. If it can be verified by one of the following method then it's science: accurately predict a previously unknown result (can be the past, just need to be unknown), can be repeated with predictable results, can be deducted accurately from a known assumption or fact.

    So breathing CO and die in 5min is scientific hypothesis that has been confirmed, not history. It is a test with results. More experiments would confirm it. However, to tell the question WHY then you need a new hypothesis other than breathing CO will kill you.

    History is problematic because nobody has a clue what happened. For example, you have a bunch of trials where eyewitness testimonies getting butchered because of something that made the eyewitness unreliable.

    Most of history is either written by the victor, remembered by some victim who might put some of their colors into the fact, some records that can be inferred or, rarely, an actual scientific record of careful research.

    2|3
    1|0

Most Helpful Girl

  • Both. There's not one without the other - literally...

    4|1
    0|0
    • You stupid mother fuckers have you humans learned anything?

    • Show All
    • Thank you for the mho!

Recommended Questions

Loading...

Have an opinion?

What Guys Said 109

  • I would say science

    1|0
    0|0
  • If that is your take away from history then your doing it wrong. History is about what happened, why it happened and how that impacted the world to this day. History is the study of ideas and how they impact the world and society. For instance have you wondered why we haven't had our current political system before? well we did in the form of rome. However due to them making many mistakes (the same ones we have been making) they ended up creating a system where the poor got poorer and the rich got richer until people where actually selling themselves into slavery in order to escape their crushing debts. This of course created a system that the roman government had to stop the freeing of slaves as otherwise it would be a quick and easy way of freeing some one from debt with no consequence which would collapse the economy (which was already occurring with their attempts to create social welfare in the form of giving free bread and grains (among other thigns) that was starting to cost the government more and more money which in turn caused them to start having to produce more money (the silver denarius if I recall correctly) which meant they had to devalue their currency by mixing other metals into it until the moneys value plummeted) This eventually gave rise to the feudalism of the dark/middle ages and why we had a dark age to begin with since all the progress that was made was basically undone because of the complete collapse of the system that rome created. This simple act that was meant to alleviate problems ended up having an impact that lasted almost a thousand years. So lets look at what is happening now, we see all the issues of the middle east, what caused it? Well the cold war between the west (primarily America) and the soviet union. This destabilized the entire middle east. Actions have consequences and that is what history studies how ideas and actions impact the world for generations to come. Of course one can also learn from these things but so few study history that those who have the power to make these choices are rarely aware of how these choices will impact the future despite the many times they have occurred through out history. Don't get me wrong I love science but history is just as nuanced (more so arguably) as science and just as important. Also science doesn't create technology, it makes discoveries, others utilize those discoveries i. e,. engineers and inventors.

    1|3
    0|0
    • Well said.

      I expect we disagree about the the lesson to be learned, though. My preferred approach would be to avoid setting up a system where the poor get poorer and the rich get richer in the first place, rather than letting the poor starve to death on the streets. A serious inheritance tax is a good start.

      Another similarity between the USA and ancient Rome is the lead in the water, although this time it's the poor getting poisoned instead of the rich. That's down to science (we know it's bad for us), and politics (the rich care more about money than they do about the poor, and the government works for the rich).

    • Show All
    • Well, presumably your society has decided that keeping old people from starving is a "communal work". Apparently, bailing out banks that have taken unnecessary risks, and maintaining the largest military ever is also a good use of your tax dollars.

    • @goaded That is a terrible argument, infantile even. That is a straw man argument and presumes quite a bit of my stance. I do not agree with the military spending, but that is still communal in nature and as such is an arguable expense, I personaly thing its misspending but its still for the benefit of the society. As for taking care of the elderly, are you reffering to social security which is a pyramid scheme? Yeah how has that worked out for us? Oh yeah my generation and the generations that come after are going to pay for it out the ass and have none of the benefits your generation and up got/get. So yeah that's theft, we pay so others can live their lives comfortably, meanwhile providing other programs like reduced taxation that would have allowed for not only more money from paychecks but also reduced the cost of most everything would have allowed for a feesible retirement (or having family act like fucking family and help out).

  • Well remember history teaches us why people did things and to understand people's mentalities at the time and what they went through in order to do or achieve anything they did. Science just tells us straight facts that are a bit confusing that's all. Every single galaxy has a new set of rules and science works differently there, but the reasons why things are done is to learn from it and will never change

    1|0
    0|0
    • Well the first sentence you wrote... that's science (psychology). But I guess I understand what you mean.

    • Yeah sorry it's late here, getting tired and my writing is bad

  • Science explains, usually, where History went wrong. Why would you think that the two should be separated, and somehow not DIRECTLY LINKED?
    History is often applications of 'Science' and sometimes the WRONG application!!
    By 'Science' you don't specify WHICH 'science': Chemistry, Physics, Psychology?

    1|1
    0|0
  • History all the way. I like science, but I love history, it's just soooo interesting.
    History is not as simple as you put it. You like science because you like to know WHY things are... well, history explains WHY society is what it is today. Like, everything you have today is because of something that happened in the past.

    1|3
    0|0
  • I enjoy more learning from science, but I find history is very rewarding too. Actually I find history is more enriching on the practical level, when sharing a conversation about political views, or social differences, etc.

    Learning from science is another kind of reward, is the one that satiates my curiosity to a higher extent.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Depends on the situation at hand. If it is a political matter, then history. If it is a technical matter, science.

    Science is good for certain things, and history is good for others. Lessons from science are absolute, objective, and lessons from history are not.

    Overall, if I had to choose between forsaking all of science or history, I'd keep the science.

    1|0
    0|0
  • i am a science person. i am a doctor. Science is really important as for now. Various jobs and scientific development in terms of health, technology etc are because of science.. but what we need to know the history. every development needs to know about the history of how it was started

    1|0
    0|0
  • Science doesn't tell you how Hitler rose to power and convinced a country to start exterminating Jews.

    3|3
    0|0
    • It's can, though... That's social science, and Milgram, and Zimbardo. We need the science that studies human nature like that, so human history does not repeat.

    • Show All
    • @HaveQuestions I don't dismiss everything labelled as "science." I am merely skeptical of it. And I am amused at the users who believe that egos never get involved in scientific debates.

    • Lmao... as am I. Egos are the precipitating factor to all scientific debates. Scientists are still human, after all.

      Skeptical is good. I won't argue with you on that, at all. We need more of that, not less. That's what drives good science.

  • I like to learn from both, history teaches us what happened and how things came to be (culturally, politically, economically, etc.) Science teaches us what we made of that. For example, history teaches us that the Earth goes through cycles of warmth & cold, science teaches us that we are way past the norm for Earth's temperature. This then stems back to history, why is the global temp so high?

    2|1
    0|0
  • Science requires history to function so it's a moot point. Science is about repeating results. I. e. remaking history. You learn through doing (testing), but the best also learn through simulation (projecting future problems, by learning from others mistakes. Aka history).

    1|2
    0|0
  • Depends on context. Science can't necessarily tell you the why of some things. Your carbon monoxide example is a good one for things it can explain, but it won't explain why it's a bad idea to try to move Armenians into Turkey, or why the Japanese are so culturally different from Americans and Europeans.

    But in a general sense, you're right, science is much more useful.

    1|1
    0|0
  • Why not both? They aren't at all exclusionary. I guess if I had to choose one I'd say Science because history isn't as universally beneficial. Like philosophy. Science or ethics would be a good Vs question.

    1|0
    0|0
  • I mostly prefer History because it tells us about our Ancestors and how they use to live and survive in different ways. It's like an Story which you can also read for entertainment purpose.

    If we talk about Science, it works on same theory everytime. It never changes or evolve, some new discoveries also happened but it also shows about what present in our environment or The Universe.

    Overall it's on you what you prefer. I hope you'd like it.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Science and history go parallel, even history is science and science becomes history.
    Yes I love history though I was a science student.
    You are absolutely right, INDIAN history says pipal tree and tulsi plant should be planted in home as they are auspicious and their timber is used in hawans (custom for purification) but science says these trees produce oxygen 24hours while other trees produce co2, which is harmful to inhale.
    You are going good, keep going, and do learn some ayurveda. :-)

    1|2
    0|0
  • History.

    The only thing greater than opinions turning into knowlesge is history turning into a lesson.

    I used to enjoy science as well.
    Then it was made complexed.

    Every theory couldn't be turned into a simple fact without a headache.

    I'm just a simple man. 🤘

    1|0
    0|0
  • Both? I mean I think the question is a little flawed. History is a soft science. When I read this it's hard to understand what you mean. It'd be like asking do you prefer to learn from science or psychology.

    1|1
    0|0
  • i disagree. we never learn from mistakes. we forget about mistakes sooner or later but we do the same mistakes over and over again. i mean you learn that if you actually study history xD science doesn´t make the same mistakes over and over.

    also you can´t learn about the same topics through history that you can learn about through science.

    1|1
    0|0
  • Science shows us how the universe works. History shows us how humans work. They are not mutually exclusive. If you know how to make a hydrogen bomb but you've learned nothing from history what good is your knowledge in science?

    1|0
    0|0
  • Good question! I think I'd have to go with history because without it we might not recognise the trick people have used to undermine science.

    I mean, climate change denial uses the same techniques as the tobacco companies used to delay the acceptance of the scientific consensus that tobacco is harmful. At the same time, and for similar reasons, people are being told that their beliefs are more important than facts and that education is a bad thing.

    1|0
    0|0
  • But don't you realize that your knowledge of science is a result of the discoveries of Europeans?

    How else would you know if Isaac Newton didn't tell you?

    1|0
    0|0
  • Science is more important in my opinion. It's learning to progress things while history is just looking back and seeing what people did wrong

    The main thing history shows is that people don't learn from it and repeat their mistakes again and again

    1|0
    0|0
  • As a child/teen, I was way into science, neglecting history.
    Now, I'm more into history (for a change), but I like both.

    A lot of "science" is just "junk science", but people blindly accept it (since they don't know much about history).

    1|0
    0|0
    • What parts of "science" are just "junk science"?

    • Show All
    • That one is down to the media, as usual. I remember it, too. However:

      "Global cooling was a conjecture during the 1970s of imminent cooling of the Earth's surface and atmosphere culminating in a period of extensive glaciation. This hypothesis had *little support* in the scientific community, but gained temporary popular attention due to a combination of a slight downward trend of temperatures from the 1940s to the early 1970s and press reports that did not accurately reflect the full scope of the scientific climate literature, which showed a larger and faster-growing body of literature projecting future warming due to greenhouse gas emissions." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

  • Definitely history. If you read long enough you see that it's not a seemingless series of events but everything connects and you are able to predict the future on many things when you know what has happened in the past. But as others have already said you can't be absolute about this. Both are important.

    1|0
    0|0
  • You can't be absolute about this. Both are valuable, and if you take one in isolation, you're not looking at it holistically.

    It also depends very much on the context, and the question.

    Your CO example is a good one, though.

    1|0
    0|0
  • I love History much more than science. I do consider History a science. However, History uses other sciences to explain itself. The ideal is using History alongside another science to explain what happened.

    1|0
    0|0
  • prefer science but need both. people trust science to much.
    there are so many scientific facts hidden to protect certain beliefs. aswell they can't explain a lot of stuff. but history is defo more f*cked lol.

    1|0
    0|0
  • It depends on what you're studying. if you are studying science alone, then you'll need to know both. if you're studying other areas, a sense of history can be critical.

    1|0
    0|0
  • they're both important. scientist learn from the history. without history, there is a very primitive or no science. without science, it's hard for history to be made. both equally important to some extent. quit dogging history.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Science. I love knowing how things work and why they do what they do. I love physics and astronomy and electronics. Beats history any day.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Show more from Guys
    79

What Girls Said 34

  • I agree! I`m a huge science person. :)

    1|0
    0|0
  • Both because the aren't mutually exclusive. History is what happened, whatwas learned in science and suppressed or someone was murdered for discovering.

    History and Science are both truths... if anyone tells you differently off with their head. Be that the truest of all.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Science for sure! I love science because it basically encompasses everything. I've answered social studies essays with things on the basis of psychology as to why America joined WW2 or similar ideas. Also there are many more career opportunities in the sciences as opposed to history.

    1|1
    0|0
  • This is a slightly unfair question for me.

    I favoured history at school. But both of my parents have PhDs in Chemistry. My father is a scientific researcher and has been for almost 40 years. My home life was/is dominated by science. It's not a choice for me, it's a lifestyle.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Hmmmm. I like them both. Both are equally important. But I think it has to do with what we're doing in them. I like learning about the ancient Egyptians and things like that in history and in science I like to do experiments.

    1|1
    0|0
  • I prefer history. Not because I necessarily trust it more or less than the other.

    I just like history more because it's like a giant story and I like stories.

    1|0
    0|0
  • I prefer history. I think this is a good question because it illustrates the difference between right and left brained people. Both are important, just quite different :)

    1|0
    0|0
  • Science for me, even though history is also interesting and I like both.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Science! I love science! I feel it is more relevant about the world around us.

    1|1
    0|0
  • If the teacher is amazing, then history.

    Otherwise science; space or criminology related.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Science because I love learning about animals and stuff , history is good to learn too but it is so boring

    1|0
    0|0
  • Both interact with each other to some extent. I like both. I really cannot pick which.

    1|0
    0|0
  • I can't say
    because it 2 different worlds
    so I love science and I love history

    1|0
    0|0
  • Science and History, both. XD

    1|1
    0|0
  • Science.

    1|0
    0|0
  • both~

    1|0
    0|0
  • I'd rather learn from history

    1|0
    0|0
  • History! Science really is too complex

    1|0
    0|0
  • history.

    1|0
    0|0
  • Both, different perspectives

    1|0
    0|0
  • science!

    1|0
    0|0
  • I'd go with science

    1|0
    0|0
  • I don't like history

    1|0
    0|0
  • history because it's all been done before

    1|0
    0|0
  • history

    1|0
    0|0
  • Science!

    1|0
    0|0
  • A mixture of both

    1|0
    0|0
  • science any time

    1|0
    0|0
  • Science... I'm studying zoology
    😇😇

    1|0
    0|0
  • neither

    1|0
    0|0
  • Show more from Girls
    4

Recommended myTakes

Loading...