Daily 2

3. Don't our traditional forms of information communication, notably "the book" and especially "the textbook" contribute to our belief in linear history? 

Our traditional forms of information communication, notably “the book” and especially “the textbook” contribute to our belief in linear history. Books, but mostly textbooks, are written in order of events. A math textbook, for example, the student would learn about variables first. Then the student would be able to solve algebraic equations, than he or she could solve systems of equations. If the student did not know what variables were, he or she could not solve systems of equations. The same is true with history text books. If the text book is about American civilization, the student would learn about Christopher Columbus before he or she learns about George Washington. Information from a textbook or a book makes more sense when it is in a chronological order. In books, the main character is introduced. The reader learns about the main character. Then, events cause other events to happen. The book is about the events and what caused them. If the reader were to write what happened in a book, he or she could easily make a timeline describing the events that happened. Books have been around longer than our knowledge or belief in linear history. People learned about information from books or other people. When a person tells another person a story from a book, he or she tells it in order of events in a linear way. This is how people understand what happened. Books and textbooks give people new knowledge that they later convey to others to teach them what happened. Linear history is an easier way to teach people. It helps them understand, because it is one event after another. “The book” and “the textbook”, definitely contribute to our belief in linear history.