Aubyn Fulton wrote:I don't either. It's a much more complicated question than that, to be sure, but whatever the answer is, assuming one's own "standards" as the default is a wholly inadequate procedure as well. One must refer to the standards, issues, practices, pressures, etc. of the time. That said, historians don't actually spend much of their time *evaluating* past actions. The goal is usually said to be to "understand" them. Expending much effort to "praise" or "condemn" is generally regarded as evidence that the researcher in question is more interested in making a polemical point about the present rather than being interested primarily in the past (pace, e.g., Gould). Regards, --
---
Christopher D. Green Department of Psychology York University Toronto, Ontario, Canada M3J 1P3 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
- RE: [tips] HH Goddard Christopher D. Green
- RE: [tips] HH Goddard Aubyn Fulton