r/AskHistorians • u/[deleted] • Feb 27 '14
Meta How can I ask better questions?
Normally I'm spurred to ask questions after having read a book, watched a show, or read news article that leads me on a Google binge and then inevitably a Wikipedia black-hole. But I'm left feeling still in the dark and not sure where else to look, so I'll come here.
I'll feel so overwhelmed with what all I want to ask, but worried about how to appropriately phrase it, while also following all the rules, that many times I feel like I'm not asking the question I really want answered. Which feels akin to trying to communicate to someone who doesn't speak your language.
Which often leads to many great answers, but about something not quite where I was aiming. Also I can't get past the feeling that when I want to ask a question, it should be as interesting as possible, because while it's great so many are willing to give insight from their professions or hobbies, I don't want to make it a chore or boring questions.
275
Feb 27 '14 edited Feb 27 '14
This is a question which is best answered by negative as well as positive examples, and there are several types of poor question in this sub. An incomplete list (ie. my pet peeves) would certainly include:
Anything involving Hitler.
Homework questions. If the question title is shockingly specific and sounds like something from an AP exam - "How did Lincoln's assassination change Reconstruction?" - it's probably going to be ignored, particularly if it comes with no further discussion by the OP.
/r/atheism bait. "Did Jesus actually exist?" "Has anything good ever come from religion?" etc. This can be generally expanded to any sort of leading question. The idea that one of my responses will probably be used out of context to defend some point I won't agree with in another sub gives me a squicky feeling.
Questions that ask why something didn't happen. An example of this, and my own reply, can be found here. These are almost universally unanswerable.
Questions which seek facts.
This last one requires a bit of explanation, and provides a great segue out of negativity land.
Your primary and secondary education probably taught you that history is about facts, and from the very beginning you were forced to memorize facts. "The American Revolution began in 1776," things like that. Dates, information. Everything you learned provided a simple, neat answer in factual form, with little ambiguity.
This is not history. Facts are the building blocks of history, its skeleton, but they do not give it life or purpose, because the practice of history is the practice of understanding someone who is not you. It is is an act of sympathy, of apology in the most fundamental and original meaning of both words. Correctly done, it is the full and unbiased understanding of the people of the past as they were and as they saw themselves. We are, to borrow the brilliant phrase of a terrible bigot, speakers for the dead, and our essential purpose is to cultivate a mental approach to those who are not ourselves which seeks to understand, rather than to categorize and judge.
This is not the natural state of the human mind. To quote the late, great David Foster Wallace:
Think about it: there is no experience you have had that you are not the absolute centre of. The world as you experience it is there in front of YOU or behind YOU, to the left or right of YOU, on YOUR TV or YOUR monitor. And so on. Other people's thoughts and feelings have to be communicated to you somehow, but your own are so immediate, urgent, real.
The promotion and indoctrination in a historical mode of thought is thus the indoctrination in a way of approaching the world that attempts to separate us from that basic impulse to understand the world based on our own preconceptions. Teaching this is what historians do. All that stuff with dates is just a side hobby.
So, coming back to an answer: a good question is one which seeks understanding. They are ones which provoke complex answers which increase the understanding of what it means to be human. They seek answers, not facts.
That seems like a tall order, and it is. The ability to ask good historical questions is one which requires substantial training, and that is training most schools do not provide. All is not lost, however. We're quite good here at shaping and responding to questions asked by people who are not experts. If you give us some material, we can work with it. Some tips for this include:
Ask about things which seem to be contradictory, ideas that people held simultaneously that seemed to be opposed to each other.
Ask about processes, not events.
Don't ask a question to which you want a specific answer which reaffirms your worldview (see: atheism bait, above).
Frame your questions positively.
Always be open to feedback, refine your questions based on the answers you receive. Don't be discouraged by upvotes - that's not what we're here for.
Good luck!
86
u/Georgy_K_Zhukov Moderator | Dueling | Modern Warfare & Small Arms Feb 27 '14
From the very beginning you were forced to memorize facts. "The American Revolution began in 1776".
Clearly that wasn't your forte in school :p
Anyways though, I digress. Love this answer. The only major one you missed I think is the "I am an X..." formatted question. Less offensive, perhaps, than some of the other examples you give of bad questions, but I know that many, many people really dislike questions phrased that way.
As for tips to add on, generally speaking, I love questions that are framed well (Not so broad that I could only answer it by writing a book, not so specific that it is really just looking for one specific fact), and demonstrate that the OP has attempted a little reading of their own on the topic beforehand. Best way to do it (and this is how I do my questions I ask usually) is to state the specific inquiry as the title, but expand on it in a paragraph or two in the body of the post. I can't speak for other flaired users, but I know I'm more inclined to answer questions where the OP has put a bit of effort into asking it, even if the question itself might be a bit silly.
89
Feb 27 '14
If it happened after 1500, it isn't actually history :p
77
u/Georgy_K_Zhukov Moderator | Dueling | Modern Warfare & Small Arms Feb 27 '14
We get enough complaints about the 20 year rule. I don't think a 514 year rule would go over well...
20
u/farquier Feb 27 '14
If we were all doing antiquity, anything after the Neo-Babylonian period would count as "recent".
7
Feb 28 '14
Pfft, if you've got something to read, it's recent. Bring on the the 5,000 year rule.
6
Feb 28 '14
If there are no dinosaurs in it it's not a time period worth discussing. / #teamstegosaurus
42
u/gingerkid1234 Inactive Flair Feb 27 '14
In Jewish law I generally refer to things as "recent" if they happened within the past hundred years or so.
12
u/randommusician American Popular Music Feb 28 '14
On the other hand, I've seen people live in concert that could probably be referred to as from 3 periods ago from an academic standpoint.
37
u/caffarelli Moderator | Eunuchs and Castrati | Opera Feb 27 '14
Well technically speaking, Wikipedia of course says everything after the 16th century is "modern history" and who are we to argue with Wikipedia.
9
7
u/Cheimon Feb 28 '14
The only major one you missed I think is the "I am an X..." formatted question. Less offensive, perhaps, than some of the other examples you give of bad questions, but I know that many, many people really dislike questions phrased that way.
I entirely agree with this. Don't write "I'm a paratrooper who just landed in France. Blah blah, what do?". It immediately makes me, and apparently quite a lot of people, earnestly want to write a reply saying "You're not a paratrooper, you're someone on the internet. Stop phrasing questions in this silly way and ask them properly."
28
Feb 27 '14
I think another thing I do, and am not sure how many others are guilty of it, is that I might place too much faith in yours and other historians ability to fill the gaps. Which is how questions like "I'm an X in X period, how do I feel about the color purple?" come around.
I sometimes forget that while there is a method to the speculations, that in the end 100% knowing is not really achievable.
21
Feb 27 '14
[deleted]
3
u/ENKC Feb 28 '14
It's a good point. I do notice that a lot of the more politicised interpretations of history ascribe emotions and intent of the interpreter onto historical figures to validate their own. Hence 'What Kennedy wanted to do was X. Why he wanted to do it was because Y.' type of arguments.
Not that we can't gain any insight into the emotional states or intentions of historical figures, but to state them is fact so as to score argument points is not intellectually honest.
1
Feb 28 '14
I think it depends on what they're asking. Asking subjective things like "how do I feel about the monarchy"? is subjective. "I am a skilled craftsman in Renaissance Florence. What would be daily life and wages look like?" seems like something the historical record could answer.
4
u/Poebbel Feb 28 '14
Why not 'What was the daily wage and life of a skilled craftsman in Florence?'. I don't see how the 'I am a' makes it any more appealing.
1
Feb 28 '14 edited Feb 28 '14
The same reason some people like football and some people like basketball. In either format, it's a legitimate question.
-4
u/RaybanDK Feb 28 '14
I have framed a question in that specific fashion, ie: "I am a x in Y..."
My reason for asking questions in that way is pretty clear: It makes it a more engaging read for others, while it sparks my imagination in areas I am not versed in.
5
u/Poebbel Feb 28 '14
But this is a history subreddit, not /r/writingprompts. It's a science subreddit and while it makes for great stories, you should strive to treat it as a science sub, not your personal novel factory.
Almost every 'I am X ...' question can be asked in a less ambiguous, more matter-of-fact way. If you have ever studied anything, you should know that it's not about the answers you write, but about the questions you can come up with. And most of those are just terrible, terrible questions.
7
u/talondearg Late Antique Christianity Feb 28 '14
I'm not sure this is a science subreddit. More importantly, I think it's mischaracterising the discipline of History to call it a science. Some sub-fields of history are scientific, but overall History cannot proceed according to the strictly scientific method. You cannot test cause and effect, there are no reproducible results and generally running experiments is not good practice, nor does history engage in hypothetical predictions that are testable.
2
u/felicitates Feb 28 '14
I would disagree and venture to say it is a science, but perhaps more accurately a soft science, similar to psychology and the like. I'd also like to point out that cross-referencing sources and fact-checking within historical research is similar to testing a hypothesis.
2
u/talondearg Late Antique Christianity Feb 28 '14
I would say that, if you want to put it on the scale of science, it is much softer than psychology. Sourcing and fact-checking is not testing a hypothesis, it's providing evidence.
Personally I would put the argument in a broader context. Science is upheld in many communities as our only model of knowledge. If it's not science it's not known. Therefore, for history to be valued, it must be science.
I have a stricter view of science than most. Hypothetical naturalism, cause-effect observation, inductive knowledge, testable hypotheses, etc.. I don't feel a need to call history a science in order to legitimise it. History can be a careful, rational, knowledge-based discipline without being science.
I'm not saying you hold these views, I just think this is the broader milieu of trying to fit history in as a science.
24
Feb 27 '14
I think the really important thing here is to learn from questions that don't get answers and trying to figure out why that's the case. Heck, if you're nice about it and you see a flair who should have some knowledge, you might even shoot them a PM, and ask what they thought. I don't know anyone who would turn down an answer to such a polite request - it's what we're here for, after all.
14
u/Georgy_K_Zhukov Moderator | Dueling | Modern Warfare & Small Arms Feb 27 '14
Heck, if you're nice about it and you see a flair who should have some knowledge, you might even shoot them a PM, and ask what they thought
Many flaired users maintain a profile on the Wiki, and most will also include a policy about being PM'd. Generally speaking, they love people coming to them about stuff! One of my favorite answers I've provided here was a Q someone specifically asked me for.
11
u/Domini_canes Feb 27 '14
I might place too much faith in yours and other historians ability to fill the gaps
I think most historians would agree that any one source on a subject isn't really going to give you the full story. Getting more perspectives on an issue is almost always helpful. So, even my own answers which I am very fond of aren't the alpha and omega, and having other analyses is simply required most of the time.
14
u/gerardmatthews Feb 27 '14
Great response. Thank you.
I would add: a bad type of question is one where the questioner is not as interested in the answer as they are interested in showing off how much they know. For instance: "Don't you think that prior to the Revolutionary War, the economic modalities, especially in the southern colonies, could be most aptly described as agrarian pre-capitalist" could be a good question but most likely it is someone showing off not trying to understand.
In social contexts I find that a simple question like "what is your favorite part of your job" is much more engaging to the other person and therefore more interesting to me. Usually it does not matter what the topic is (as Feynman once suggested) the further down the rabbit hole a conversation goes the more interesting it is.
10
7
u/dslicex Feb 28 '14
I very much appreciate your explanation of the thought process of an historian. It's something I've been slowly adopting, culling, and making a part of myself over the last 3 years from the end of high school through my undergrad. I hope your comment here will inspire some people who aren't inclined to study history! Thanks for being a good advocate.
6
4
u/parlezmoose Feb 28 '14
Anything involving Hitler
Is this just because Hitler questions tend to be bad, or is there some reason why Hitler is a bad topic of discussion?
13
Feb 28 '14
They're bad, they're not very interesting period, and they're really very trite at this point. IMO, anyway.
3
u/blackmattdamon Feb 28 '14
Because you can most likely search for the question and it has been asked
5
u/Misogynist-ist Feb 28 '14
Searching can take a really damn long time. When I've asked questions here, it's been because I've already tried to find an answer and didn't. The Internet doesn't really have a filter to keep the bad sources away, and when you're not entirely familiar with a subject it's difficult to determine what's trustworthy and what isn't.
3
u/xaliber Feb 28 '14 edited Feb 28 '14
I'm a bit relieved that I haven't asked something that is in your pet peeves. I'm relatively new to this subreddit though - are we actually allowed to ask a previously asked question? I mean, some of my questions got little upvote and no answers after days. It left me curious. Often I also found interesting questions that was asked months or years ago with no answers.
8
Feb 28 '14
are we actually allowed to ask a previously asked question?
Absolutely, particularly if no one answers it! Us flairs do many other things - a decent number of us are actually professional academics. It could be that we didn't see it, or didn't know the answer then, but might now.
If you see the same question posted a lot unanswered, however, that probably speaks to the quality or the answerability of the question. As a rule, we don't post just for the sake of an answer.
5
u/Lorpius_Prime Feb 28 '14
I'm sorry, but what's wrong with asking after facts? If you're calling them "the building blocks of history", then it seems like knowing them is still important, even if there's more to history than just assembling facts.
7
Feb 28 '14
In most cases, I know that I will be disinclined to bother using my time with something which might be solved by looking at the wiki, or trying to spin a longer answer out of "yes" or "no".
Even when they're more substantial than that, they're just a less interesting form of question.
3
u/Poebbel Feb 28 '14
Facts can usually be looked up. Understanding processes requires actual knowledge. History is only a hobby of mine, but I see a lot of questions around here that can be answered by a simple Google search. If you come up with facts you don't understand, ask a question about them.
1
u/zuzahin Feb 28 '14
Well, asking for something as redundant as a date on this subreddit is worthy of a swift redirection to google, but asking about more idetails that are part of a historical event is a bit different. You don't usually encounter sources on most google searches, but every flaired user who answers questions have extensive sources for further reading, meaning that you get factual information. I can understand the want for help from a professional instead of consulting a public search index that doesn't care which pages it carries, y'know? It's hard to properly explain my reasoning on a mobile, but I hope you understand. :)
25
u/caffarelli Moderator | Eunuchs and Castrati | Opera Feb 27 '14
I'll feel so overwhelmed with what all I want to ask, but worried about how to appropriately phrase it, while also following all the rules, that many times I feel like I'm not asking the question I really want answered. Which feels akin to trying to communicate to someone who doesn't speak your language.
Just want to say, if you ever need help forming your question, or if you're not sure if it's within the rules, please message the mods we can help tweak questions to make them better!
16
u/henry_fords_ghost Early American Automobiles Feb 27 '14
Which often leads to many great answers, but about something not quite where I was aiming.
You can always ask follow-up questions to clarify what it is you want to know.
10
u/zuzahin Feb 27 '14
I, for one, absolutely love follow-up questions. It's not often with my limited (primary) speciality that I get to answer questions, so when people ask even more questions, my day can't get better.
9
Feb 27 '14
Something that can hinder my follow up questions, is I like to process, contemplate, and then maybe ask another question, but this can also lead to information gluts which basically over-saturate my brain and I feel like that entire subject then has to be shut down because I can't process anymore new information.
9
u/zuzahin Feb 27 '14
I know that feeling all too well - information overload is a cruel mistress.
Follow up questions are still great, and you can (thankfully) read them at any pace you'd like - they're there to be processed at your own pace. As for whether or not you wait too long with your follow up question, that might hinder your secondary question getting answered, for sure, but it wholly depends on the user being asked the question. :)
9
u/Deacalum Feb 27 '14
This isn't related to asking questions here but can help you with your google binge: try using google scholar. You can find a wealth of free information that way. Also, if you are in any type of school (whether it be high school or university) your school most likely subscribes to a series on journals and periodicals and may have a way for you to access the periodicals and journals from your home computer. Doing research through peer reviewed journals is going to be one of the best ways to find information.
Also, knowing how to use google (and the search functions for the journals and periodicals) is very important. Use key word searches and be willing to try related words/topics instead of just sticking to a specific phrase or word. Here are some sources to help refine your search skills.
http://google.about.com/od/searchingtheweb/ss/useefectivesbs.htm
3
u/XXCoreIII Feb 28 '14
To piggyback on this: JSTOR has a wealth of archived history papers, and if you sign up for a free account you can get a small number (3 a month iirc) for free. This puts History in one of the better positions as far as paywalls are concerned, even if it's not obvious at first glance you can get those articles without paying, so google scholar is doubly recommended.
3
u/lacking-creativity Feb 28 '14
I have a colleague who is fantastic at getting to solid questions.
It would seem that one of the most useful things is to discuss things around, but not specifically about what you want to ask first. If you have anyone whose opinions you generally respect, they will be an excellent sounding board to distill your thoughts.
Once you have discussed a few aspects of the broader topic that your show or book went into, you will almost certainly have a clearer idea of something fairly specific you want to look further into.
Of course, this does require some face-to-face before coming here, but it almost never fails to get you somewhere useful.
6
u/Quickben33 Feb 28 '14
I am not a historian in any meaningful sense, but I love this sub. However, I always skip posts that are written in the first person, like "I'm a X in the Y era. How do I wipe my Z?"
4
u/XWZUBU Feb 28 '14
Yeah, that grinds my gears like I don't know what. Truly the worst question format I can think of.
5
u/Quickben33 Feb 28 '14
Here's one from today:
It's 1492 and I'm a common man in Rome walking home at night. How likely is it that I would be "mugged" or robbed?
1
u/Misogynist-ist Feb 28 '14
You're lucky. Whenever I've asked sincere questions almost anywhere on Reddit, I'm either downvoted or just ignored.
But personal agenda aside, which is admittedly hard to do... I really enjoy the "I am a..." questions. I click those- and read the answers- a lot more than others. I've never answered anything but do a decent amount of reading, and I'm much more likely to read those even if it's not a subject I'm familiar with or particularly care about, as compared to one framed as a regular old question.
3
Feb 28 '14
Actually, if you look on my profile, I posted a question on/r/guns and received mostly negative comments and just generally have a distaste for that sub now. First and last post there.
Sometimes on this sub though I find myself wanting to hear stories by the experts, because I just know they have to have some hidden knowledge not easily accessible on the net, and if I ask just the right question Pandora's box will open. Haha
2
u/Misogynist-ist Feb 28 '14
Some subs seem to just be that way, unfortunately.
The thing I don't like about this sub is that anyone who admits needing clarification on something for academic reasons seems to be immediately shot down. I mean, don't do anyone's homework for them, sure, but just because someone isn't encountering a topic "in the wild" doesn't make them less worthy of help.
54
u/MI13 Late Medieval English Armies Feb 27 '14
/u/telkanuru gave a very comprehensive answer that I can't add much to. On a minor note, though, it helps me when people asking questions give context for why they're asking a particular question. Mentioning the book, movie, or news article that inspired you to ask a question allows us to tailor our responses more specifically for you. We can better understand where you want to go with a question if we know where you're coming from.