3 ms·
"Khan does the latter, it is called an overview." It is an overview, but absurdly condensed. A skill like calculus can be thought in brief, clear overviews; yo
by BasDirks 15y ago
"Khan does the latter, it is called an overview."
It is an overview, but absurdly condensed. A skill like calculus can be thought in brief, clear overviews; you either understand _it_ or you don't.
History is no such _it_.
- nl 15y agoPerhaps. And yet few historically literate people understand the intimate workings of the alliance system prior to WW1[1] - but it is a vital piece of background information that explains a lot about what happened. In my view, "the great powers had alliances and went to war to support one another" sums it up reasonably well, despite ignoring viral things like the 1839 Treaty of London[2], etc. For someone studying post-Vietnam US history (say), I think the Kahn summary might be a reasonable background. Probably not sufficient in itself, but reasonable. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_World_War_I#Web_of_alliances http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_World_War_I#Web_of_al... [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_London,_1839 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_London,_1839
- TeMPOraL 15y agoIt's not about "you understand" xor "you don't understand". It's about level of detail. The idea of 'overview' I have in mind is similar to how mipmapping and LOD works in video games/computer graphics.