The historian’s fallacy is an informal fallacy that occurs when one assumes that decision Fischer did not suggest that historians should refrain from retrospective analysis in their work, but he reminded historians that their subjects were not. Full text of “Historians Fallacies Toward A Logic Of Historical Thought” ; quoted in Roger A. Fischer, “Racial Segregation in Ante Bellum New Orleans,”. HISTORIANS’. FALLACIES. Toward a Logic of Historical Thought by David Hackett Fischer. HARPER & ROW, PUBLISHERS. NEW YORK, EVANSTON, AND.
|Published (Last):||8 December 2014|
|PDF File Size:||8.69 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||8.51 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The logic chopping is a little pedantic at times but the overall affect is greater clarity on how to reach responsible historical conclusions.
The fisxher that it cannot pull down all wrong signs, or that pulling down is a destructive act, cannot be an argument against it. The signs say, “A, this way, seven miles,” but point squarely to noX-A. Its Find- ings and Methods,” ibid. Beard delicately confined his investigation to pocketbooks; McDonald also inspected the stomachs, glands, and genitals of the Founding Fathers.
A historian must learn to resist that form of debilitation which has been called “hardening of the This book, faallacies I loved, actually unfitted me for life in America.
Although at times I disagreed with him, and he tends toward too academic language and creating terms for things that just need explaining, it is a very helpful book. But the sparse positive suggestions he produces as postscripts to the catalogues of errors prove to be rather commonplace roles of right reasoning; their enumeration seems justified only by the rather hefty evidence Fischer marshals to demonstrate how blithely they are ignored.
And are we, for this reason, to announce the “bankruptcy” of science, as is so often and so flippantly done?
The song is called ‘Ways and Means’: This is not a book on history but on how to look at, and work with history. But Barrington Moore’s idea of a radical revolution begins with violence as a central and limiting charac- teristic.
Fallacies of Factual Verification. Maybe that Byzantine character was neither a rat nor a fink, but something vastly more intricate, or something altogether different. How does one distinguish the latter from the former?
That judgment is safe, and maybe sound I believe otherwise. Not perfect, but worth a read for anyone interested in writing history.
In the end, there is a conundrum: Dec 28, Charles M. It deals in “if, then” propositions, unlike much social “theory,” which is com- monly more paradigmatic in its nature.
Full text of “Historians Fallacies Toward A Logic Of Historical Thought”
The result is a dialogue between essayists and monographers which resembles the ex- change between Hamlet and Polonius: But, I did learn something substantial in that first chapter: Crane Brinton’s explanatory generalization hypothesis that sociopolitical revolutions tend to happen in societies which are relatively prosperous, progressive, and “on the upgrade economically” is not a tautology.
The idea that a critic can make erroneous interpretations of past works because of knowledge of subsequent events was first articulated by British literary critic Matthew Arnold. Traveling some 70, miles in a battered, secondhand Plymouth, 43 he collected a wealth of information in order to construct working models of the eco- nomic and political structure of American society circa and to compile brief economic biographies of the men who participated in the Great Convention, and the state ratifying conventions as well.
The most satis- 12 INQUIRY factory response, I think, is to indicate the structural deficiencies in the question-framing and to revise the inquiry on that level, by the intro- duction of a more refined and more open question, discher can be flexibly adjusted faallacies the analysis proceeds.
Prominent among his takings from sociology was the idea of the “potentially verifiable” question, which he elevated historiajs an explicit method and urged upon his colleagues as a new tool of fallacied inquiry. But, I did at least learn a little bit about how historians write and the many fallacies that could make or break their reputation as great historians.
The only difference was that McDonald’s conspiracies were more numerous and more complex.
I am indebted to Polanyi’s work for the idea of a tacit logic and for many other things, though I disagree with him on this point. Now and then a study appears which suggests that this dream is more than merely a fishcer Utopian fancy. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Historians’ Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought – David Hackett Fischer – Google Books