Abstract:
One of the issues of critical philosophy of history is whether the kind of results that historians claim to prove have the same objectivity that scientists of experimental sciences generally claim to achieve or not? The main reason of relativists in denying the objectivity of historians' results is reasoning through selection. Objectivists, on the other hand, claim that "the fact that historians are selective in conducting their research is not a characteristic of historical research, but a characteristic of any type of research" and in this sense, there is no difference between historical research and other types of research.
Machine summary:
"Abstract: One of the issues of critical philosophy of history is whether the kind of results that historians claim to prove have the same objectivity that scientists of experimental sciences generally claim to achieve or not? The main reason for relativists in denying the objectivity of historians' results is In this chapter, in order to organize the discussion, the focus of our investigation will be this question.Since history requires ethical and aesthetic considerations, should it be considered non-objective? A narrative of the issue of objectivity, although it is not the only important narrative, has actually provided a framework for many discussions of objectivity by philosophers and historians. According to Ernst Nigel, the question is whether the value framework of the historian "in addition to being causally influential on his research, logically, lies in the validity criteria and equally in the meaning of his propositions or not?"If this is the case, regrets such as Becker's and Baird's regrets will no longer be of much importance; Because if the value of judgment is logically part of the essence of the idea of ​​historical research, it does not make sense for historians to even have a desire to be objective. For example, if the goal is to write the history of the Spanish EmpireThe events that took place in China in the 4th century BC can be contentedly ignored, and if what is being written is economic history, it is not necessary to consider the claims of religious revival except as a possible condition to explain the events or conditions. An economy that has already been selected."