Re: [Rollei] Re: History

["Richard Knoppow" <dickburk >]

- ----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eric Goldstein" <egoldste  >
To: <rollei  
Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 2004 6:17 AM
Subject: [Rollei] Re: History


> Bob - I can understand why... think about the notion that
you are "correcting" the error; your account is just as
likely as flawed as the one you are correcting...
>
> The point is that each observer/interpretor will see and
interpret differently; collectively and in the context of
time we can begin to understand the general nature of
historical events...
>
> Eric Goldstein
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Shell <bob  >
> Sent: Jun 29, 2004 7:38 AM
> To: rollei  us
> Subject: Re: [Rollei] History
>
>
> History is nebulous at best.  I've read historical
accounts of events
> in the photo industry that I was personally witness to,
and they are
> often wrong or commit serious sins of omission.  I've
tried to correct
> errors and been rebuked for my efforts.


     There is a line somewhere in _War and Peace_ to the
point that memories of war are so distorted by the
conditions of observation that they are never true no matter
how honest the observer is trying to be. I think its also
well to remember that in law eye witness testimony is
considered less reliable than other direct evidence, or even
some circumstantial evidence, despite the popular idea that
its the best evidence. The whole method of scientific
research is based on the idea that direct observation is
often flawed.

- ---
Richard Knoppow
Los Angeles, CA, USA
dickburk  

------------------------------