Reading “Bad” Ideas

One of the most challenging things for high school history students, in my estimation anyway, is the ability to step outside of their own worldview to look at historical ideas and historical actors on their own terms. Leaning how to think historically is a key aspect of their education in the humanities: they learn the vital significance of context. And once they get it, they begin to understand why historical actors did what they did.   

An important part of this transition to historical thinking is grasping the concept of human agency – people making decisions based on their historical realities and their understanding of how the world worked and what was best for their society or their community as they defined it. Emphasizing human agency encourages them to think about things like economic, legal, political, or what we might call “systemic” determinism in new and perhaps more nuanced ways.

And so, I work very hard to get my kids to consider why any individual or particular group of people might have embraced ideas that we might today find very troubling indeed. Take for example the South Carolina statesman John C. Calhoun’s ideas about slavery as a positive good (for the slave), or Justice Henry Billings Brown’s endorsement of codified racial segregation, or Senator and presidential candidate Barry Goldwater’s harsh critique of the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960s.

Remember friends, I am not trying to get kids to agree with these ideas, but rather – to understand them. Otherwise, the past just becomes nonsensical. Why they might ask, would people embrace concepts, laws, and practices that were obviously bad ideas? The answer, of course, is because the historical actors in question did not envision the world the way that we do – and many of them did not see these ideas in such a way. Even those who challenged the ideas of the past did so in ways that would seem alien to us – abolitionists who supported colonization for black people, for example.   

There is a valuable and practical lesson here. I train my kids in historical thinking because it will teach them to listen to and understand unfamiliar or troubling ideas in college and beyond – in the real world. Assuming that those behind the ideas are articulating them in good faith, they will be able to take the ideas seriously, contemplate them in a sophisticated way, and evaluate the evidence in support. They may still think the ideas fall short, but at least they will understand why some people might see and interpret things differently.

My social has been alive with these conversations for a minute now – here are two examples: one on Insta and the other on TikTok. My goal in class is to push past the discomfort, to have the tough conversations, and to acknowledge multiple perspectives. These kids are heading off to a very contentious, complex world – the least I can do is to help get them ready to deal.