What do you think?
Rate this book
History and Human Flourishing
"What is the value of history for life? And how, if at all, might historians and their work contribute to human flourishing and well-being? Those are the straightforward, if capacious, questions that the distinguished contributors to this volume were asked to consider. The essays gathered here represent their responses. Each essay considers the value of history for life and its connections to human flourishing from a different standpoint and perspective. The answers are often deeply personal, but collectively they concur in affirming history and the historical craft as tremendous resources for human well-being and of vital importance for our times"--
- GenresHistoryPhilosophy
248 pages, Kindle Edition
Published December 6, 2022
31 people want to read
About the author
Darrin M. McMahon
22 books25 followersDarrin M. McMahon is a historian, author, and public speaker, who lives in Tallahassee, Florida, and the Ben Weider Professor of History at Florida State University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
September 7, 2023
Why do we study history?
James Pawelski has put together a series of books examining the “why” of humanities in general, with volumes on history, philosophy, theater, music, and other branches, asking specifically whether and how each may contribute to “human flourishing.” This comes in the context of declining college enrollments in the humanities and a more general focus on STEM.
This volume, edited by Darrin McMahon, puts history on the spot.
It’s a little surprising, and maybe a little disconcerting, that so many of the contributors do not have well-committed answers to the question. My suspicion is that the fault is not all their own, but that there is something much broader going on.
It’s not as if books, movies, and historical documentaries about historical themes are unpopular. It’s more that, again I suspect, “history” has become more of a strorehouse to be plundered and used — historical facts distorted or picked over to support political and cultural purposes.
Okay, rant on that one over.
A number of contributors relate the question to the “positive psychology” movement. Psychological research and treatment has historically focused on diagnosis and treatment of disorders rather than, in a “positive” direction, aiding in the expansion of healthy flourishing.
Analogously, in historical research, we can diagnose the causes of current ills, wars, and failures, or we might adopt a “scientific” neutral perspective but we might also learn paths to expand and strengthen “healthy” potentials.
Some of the suggestions take up those kinds of paths, in particular, gaining a sense of something bigger than oneself and maybe a place in that something bigger that transcends our individual lives and gives them meaning, both individually and collectively.
Although not stated so specifically here, there is also the possibility, akin to literature, of experiencing multiple lives, living life enriched by multiple perspectives. With historical understanding, those perspectives can multiply temporally and geographically. We gain the ability to experience crises, triumphs, and failures over the broadest of spectrums.
When we draw back to the question, and to the nature of “history” itself, I think we discover some founding questions:
- Where are we now, historically?
- How did we get here?
- What path are we following and where is it taking us?
- What choices determine the path forward?
Some of the contributions are more specific, but exemplify those founding questions. For example, Mia Bay’s “Toward a History of Black Happiness” takes us down the cultural path of African Americans, opening up that question of the path forward with possibilities grounded in that path already traveled.
One of the most interesting contributions is Peter Struck’s discussion of the role of “luck” in Aristotle’s conception of happiness. Here it is less a matter of tracing events or cultural currents than rediscovering in the past a viable and potentially accessible conception of happiness that contrasts with the consumerist conception that we seem to have fallen so deeply into.
Many or most of the thoughts here take a “presentist” perspective on the past, something that has not always been well-respected in historical studies. After all, the past is the past, to be understood in its own terms rather than entirely as a precursor or generator of the present.
David Armitage’s “In Defense of Presentism” though points to seemingly unavoidable facts of perspective — we are in the present, influenced by the present, with all its concerns and questions about the future. That is one very legitimate reason for studying history.
Now that I’ve read this volume, I’m curious to read some of the others. Although the umbrella of the humanities lends a generality to the discussion, each discipline seems to offer special challenges but also some at least apparent directions for responding — history permits us to learn from the past, philosophy explicitly takes up ethical questions. In some of these instances though, the disciplines may have wandered away from those potentials and need resets.
James Pawelski has put together a series of books examining the “why” of humanities in general, with volumes on history, philosophy, theater, music, and other branches, asking specifically whether and how each may contribute to “human flourishing.” This comes in the context of declining college enrollments in the humanities and a more general focus on STEM.
This volume, edited by Darrin McMahon, puts history on the spot.
It’s a little surprising, and maybe a little disconcerting, that so many of the contributors do not have well-committed answers to the question. My suspicion is that the fault is not all their own, but that there is something much broader going on.
It’s not as if books, movies, and historical documentaries about historical themes are unpopular. It’s more that, again I suspect, “history” has become more of a strorehouse to be plundered and used — historical facts distorted or picked over to support political and cultural purposes.
Okay, rant on that one over.
A number of contributors relate the question to the “positive psychology” movement. Psychological research and treatment has historically focused on diagnosis and treatment of disorders rather than, in a “positive” direction, aiding in the expansion of healthy flourishing.
Analogously, in historical research, we can diagnose the causes of current ills, wars, and failures, or we might adopt a “scientific” neutral perspective but we might also learn paths to expand and strengthen “healthy” potentials.
Some of the suggestions take up those kinds of paths, in particular, gaining a sense of something bigger than oneself and maybe a place in that something bigger that transcends our individual lives and gives them meaning, both individually and collectively.
Although not stated so specifically here, there is also the possibility, akin to literature, of experiencing multiple lives, living life enriched by multiple perspectives. With historical understanding, those perspectives can multiply temporally and geographically. We gain the ability to experience crises, triumphs, and failures over the broadest of spectrums.
When we draw back to the question, and to the nature of “history” itself, I think we discover some founding questions:
- Where are we now, historically?
- How did we get here?
- What path are we following and where is it taking us?
- What choices determine the path forward?
Some of the contributions are more specific, but exemplify those founding questions. For example, Mia Bay’s “Toward a History of Black Happiness” takes us down the cultural path of African Americans, opening up that question of the path forward with possibilities grounded in that path already traveled.
One of the most interesting contributions is Peter Struck’s discussion of the role of “luck” in Aristotle’s conception of happiness. Here it is less a matter of tracing events or cultural currents than rediscovering in the past a viable and potentially accessible conception of happiness that contrasts with the consumerist conception that we seem to have fallen so deeply into.
Many or most of the thoughts here take a “presentist” perspective on the past, something that has not always been well-respected in historical studies. After all, the past is the past, to be understood in its own terms rather than entirely as a precursor or generator of the present.
David Armitage’s “In Defense of Presentism” though points to seemingly unavoidable facts of perspective — we are in the present, influenced by the present, with all its concerns and questions about the future. That is one very legitimate reason for studying history.
Now that I’ve read this volume, I’m curious to read some of the others. Although the umbrella of the humanities lends a generality to the discussion, each discipline seems to offer special challenges but also some at least apparent directions for responding — history permits us to learn from the past, philosophy explicitly takes up ethical questions. In some of these instances though, the disciplines may have wandered away from those potentials and need resets.
Displaying 1 of 1 review