Question

write a short story with the message "Ghosts are a figment of one's imagination"​

Answer 1

Answer:

$\huge\mathbb\pink{Question}$

write a short story with the message "Ghosts are a figment of one's imagination"

$\huge\mathfrak\orange{Answer}$

Explanation:

If we stain our memories we will remember some ghost stories that we used to hear from our grandparents when we were kids. This vast world is filled up with a variety of creatures.

Are there creatures that we can sometimes feel but never see?

Such stories are numerous, but most people have never come across such entities. It is human nature not to believe in something without evidence.

• But there are some reports of ghosts that can really challenge the senses and scare oneself, whether one is lucky enough to see such an entity or not.

• Most religions agree that the physical body is temporary and that something survives death.

Hope it's helpful for you .

$\large\underline\green{\sf mark me as brainlist.}$

Answer 2

Answer:

The desire or dream to be able to write an omniscient account of historical events is something that most contemporary historiographers have openly abandoned. This shift in disciplinary practice is apparent in recent work by historiographers on India's Partition. Here, historiographers have redirected their attention towards explorations of 'the particular' rather than 'the general' in an effort to disrupt the state's universalizing and hegemonic historical narratives. To this end, historiographers have turned to literary texts and their representations of what has been called 'the everyday' (Pandey 1994 221) in search of alternative perspectives to that of the state's central archive. The use of representations of 'the everyday' in historical research not only provides an alternative narrative of historical events but also simultaneously brings to crisis 'modernist' assumptions within the discipline of History. [2] It is with this in mind, I think, that Gyanendra Pandey argues that "the historian needs to struggle to recover 'marginal' voices and memories, forgotten dreams and signs of resistance, if history is to be anything more than a celebratory account of the march of certain victorious concepts and powers like the nation-state, bureaucratic rationalism, capitalism, science and progress" (1994 214).

Pandey's attempts to write into history the ambivalences that produce a discourse of modernity have often included references to literary and autobiographical texts. It becomes evident, however, that the historiographer cannot merely use alternative sources for historical research if s/he seeks to question the concept of the nation-state and the power relations implicit in the modernist project of writing History. Also needed is a thoroughly discursively informed reading and writing practice that is attentive to the literariness of narrative and the undecidability of all texts.[3] In effect, without considering the relation between the linguistic construction of 'literary' and 'historical' narratives, historiographers' challenge to modernity is undermined by problematic assumptions disclosed in the (re)deployment of representations of the self, experience, and agency as they are received in and through narrative.

MARK ME AS BRAINLIST