Razgovor:Jovan I. Deretić

Pseudo Historian

The very first line labels Mr. Deretic as Pseudo Historian. This was a judgement about him, made by one article in Politika, as I recall. Nevertheless, I believe that we should change this page so this is clearly explained as a trivia and another's opinion of Mr. Deretic.

As things stand now, anyone who reads wikipedia would get an impression that Mr.Deretic was a Pseudo Historian. By some he was percieved in this way, by others, he was not.

Because of this, it would be truthfull to clearly state that he was a Historian, denied by Politika and some of his peers.

And it would be respectfull to add this to trivia cathegory, rather than this being 1st thing one can learn about Mr.Deretic.

If this remains, wikipedia will be a Pseudo Judge. – Vreljanski (razgovor) 19:30, 10 novembar 2023 (CET)

Poštovani, hvala na primjedbi, nadam se da će kritike svakako uploditi korisnom raspravom. Druge kolege su izrazile svoju sumnju prema autoru a ja isti sam skeptičan prema nekim historijografijama, jer gdje imamo jedan ekstrem, odmah se otvara prazan prostor za suprotan ekstrem. Stoga, gdje god pokašavamo svjedočiti i prepričati prošlost, postavljaju nam se tri glavna pitanja: 1) činjenice; 2) dokumenti; 3) perspektiva. Pitanje perspektive kod profesionalnih historičara nije toliko problematično, jer svaka dostojna akademija se temelji na metodologiji, dok na wikipediji to je već složeniji pojam i zahtijeva više razmišljanja. Naš česti problem je to što ljudi na wikipediji zagovaraju neke nacionalne borbe (ili političko-ideološke) pa pri tome traže lake izvore koje bi podržale sumnjive izjave. I tu podršku nađu kod nekih autora. Sa jedne strane, nema ništa loše u tome, kada bismo samo u svakom članku imali doprinose svih suprotnih strana. No, to nije slučaj a glavni cilj wikipedije nije bit izložba ili sponzor nekog pojedinca, firme/tvrtke ili nečijih nacionalnih/ideoloških interesa nego je biti „slobodna enciklopedija”. Kao skroman projekt, često smo morali rezati ekstremne rubove, da se nebi stvarao prostor borbe svih protiv svih, tj. brod luđaka iz kojeg se šire manipulacije informacija (fake news), no nekoliko kolega je već izrazilo želju da kroz vrijeme počnemo rad čišćenja historijske neistine, revizionizma, propagande itd. Pažnja: ne pričam o „potrebi za cenzurom”, nego o slučajevima gdje se očito manipulira predstavom historijskih činjenica.

Po temi Deretića, članak već izlaže glavne kontradiktore, tako da možete slobodno doprinijeti pod uvjetom da vas prate izvori.– Inokosni organ (razgovor) 23:58, 10 novembar 2023 (CET)

Neozbiljna primjedba. Pseudohistoričar, bez filozofije. – Orijentolog (razgovor) 21:15, 11 novembar 2023 (CET)

Nisam Deretića čitao (niti me toliko zanima), slušao sam neke debate i njegove izjave i to je mome uhu zvučilo kao revizionizam, tako da za naslov „pseudohistoričara” mogu se složiti. Mislim, ako se ovo tvrdi u njegovim knjigama, to po mome spada u znanstvenu fantastiku ili točnije u literaturu alternativne historije, dakle knjige u kojoj ćemo tražiti dramsku napetost da bismo procijenili da li valja nečemu. Moj odgovor suštinski želi samo držati otvorenu raspravu (radi principa), a to što su neke njegove teze jednostavno smiješne nije teško dokazati. – Inokosni organ (razgovor) 21:32, 11 novembar 2023 (CET)

Da. Samo nemoj pomicati uvlake jer ispada da sam odgovarao tebi, a zapravo sam odgovarao njemu. Orijentolog (razgovor) 22:43, 11 novembar 2023 (CET)

Pardon.– Inokosni organ (razgovor) 23:18, 11 novembar 2023 (CET)

Gentlemen,

I am glad that I managed to get some opinions on this subject. I would use the English language in this conversation as it is of international nature. I am glad that Mr. Deretic's work is known and evaluated outside of the borders of Serbia, based on the language you have used to reply. Also I would like to hear some opinions from Historians from Serbia as well. Especially due to all recent events. For the purpose of broad understanding of this particular topic. I would urge you to use English also. That way we can give a chance to a wider audience to understand the issue here.

I am not trying to initiate a debate on whether Mr. Deretic's theories were right or wrong. Nor shall I say my opinion. It is only one article in one newspaper that you used to label his entire essence. It is not just. We should leave sources, that our children will use to write history. Not make conclusions.

I am here to defend the right of every human being, not to be labeled, at least after his death. Mr. Deretic was more than Historian, he was a Politician, a Scientist and maybe even a very imaginative Writer...

But, please, I beg you in the name of justice and humanity, do not continue the practice of communism and its secret services and label dissidents. Give this man some justice in his rest. Please, just change pseudo to historian, or writer... and say he was considered pseudo by his peers in the very next sentence. This way it is like a judgment. And you know that we must not judge for at least 50-100 years. Right? Let us leave History to be written by those to whom it will belong. I beg you.

P.S. Herodot had at least 10 absolutely mad and hilarious claims... does that makes him PseudoHistorian ? – 87.116.133.30 21:28, 7 decembar 2023 (CET)

It will not be changed, since he represents a true pseudo-historian. It is not just one reference, but a whole section of "criticism" where professional historians review his work. Your comments and suggestions are ridiculous. – Orijentolog (razgovor) 07:01, 9 decembar 2023 (CET)

'Ko će koga prepoznat', nego svoj svoga... :P – Edgar A. Poe 13:56, 9 decembar 2023 (CET)