I realize that alot of historical events, comments and analysis in history writings were based on logic. A series of events had to be at least logically correct or sound.
Are there any study of logic in the history field? How effective is logic used to support historical theory or proving historical accuracy?
Full Version: Logic in history study and method
Hi GZ,
A basic understanding of logic helps a lot when you try to find flaws in other historians' arguments, but this ability doesn't have to come from formal training in logic or philosophy. Historians also need a good understanding of the practices that lead to the writing of historical documents, they are supposed to have a good sense of what is and isn't plausible, and they need to make sure their historical points follow from the evidence they present, but I don't really associate these skills with "logic" per se. Your question is difficult to answer because it is very broad! Were you thinking of any problem in particular when you asked about the use of logic by historians?
Cheers,
Madalibi
A basic understanding of logic helps a lot when you try to find flaws in other historians' arguments, but this ability doesn't have to come from formal training in logic or philosophy. Historians also need a good understanding of the practices that lead to the writing of historical documents, they are supposed to have a good sense of what is and isn't plausible, and they need to make sure their historical points follow from the evidence they present, but I don't really associate these skills with "logic" per se. Your question is difficult to answer because it is very broad! Were you thinking of any problem in particular when you asked about the use of logic by historians?
Cheers,
Madalibi
I agree with Madalibi that the question could perhaps do with some refinement.
In the absence of that, may I give some almost randomly assembled thoughts?
Logic is at the heart of epistemology, which whether formally or otherwise is, is essential to the study of history.
In a more sublime but related way, the study of logic provides an intellectual rigour which aids in all intellectual pursuits.
In the absence of that, may I give some almost randomly assembled thoughts?
Logic is at the heart of epistemology, which whether formally or otherwise is, is essential to the study of history.
In a more sublime but related way, the study of logic provides an intellectual rigour which aids in all intellectual pursuits.
QUOTE (William O'Chee @ Oct 6 2008, 08:27 AM) 
I agree with Madalibi that the question could perhaps do with some refinement.
In the absence of that, may I give some almost randomly assembled thoughts?
Logic is at the heart of epistemology, which whether formally or otherwise is, is essential to the study of history.
In a more sublime but related way, the study of logic provides an intellectual rigour which aids in all intellectual pursuits.
In the absence of that, may I give some almost randomly assembled thoughts?
Logic is at the heart of epistemology, which whether formally or otherwise is, is essential to the study of history.
In a more sublime but related way, the study of logic provides an intellectual rigour which aids in all intellectual pursuits.
The fact is if Truth is the ultimate Logic, then logic does not mean to be Truth. A historian, with good historical knowledge on his field will eventually create a clear logic in his argument.
QUOTE (Boleslaw I @ Oct 8 2008, 01:46 AM)
The fact is if Truth is the ultimate Logic, then logic does not mean to be Truth. A historian, with good historical knowledge on his field will eventually create a clear logic in his argument.
Very clever, Boleslaw, to link logic and truth.
The unstated assumption in your post is that the goal of history is to write or discover the truth. I would agree, but it is an important assumption to make clear, and all credit to you for so doing.
I am not sure, though, that I am sure about the second half of your statement that: "...if Truth is the ultimate Logic, then logic does not mean to be Truth". Logic does not necessarily purport to be the truth.
Let me put it the other way around. If the role of history is the discovery and writing of the truth, what is the role of logic in that process?
Logic is critical in that it allows the historian to discern between two plausible historical "facts". Though there may be many assumptions or apparent "facts" in one's "knowledge", they must be tested to establish whether or not they are truths. Logic is critical in this process.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.