Practice question · Select all that apply
What makes a historical argument honest?
Hints
- Honesty is measured by whether a reader could disagree.
- Concealing the weak points is the opposite of the standard.
Show the answer
- A. Giving the reader enough to disagree with you
- B. Distinguishing "the record shows" from "it is likely" from "I suspect"
- C. Saying plainly what the evidence cannot settle
Why
The measure is not confidence but whether a reader can see exactly where the argument would break. One that survives because its foundations were hidden is worth less than one that fails visibly.
Practise Source Criticism in Practice
The app has 4 more questions on this lesson, and keeps your place in the course. History I is free to start.
More questions on Source Criticism in Practice
- Complete the practice.
- Put the questions of source criticism in their working order.
- Sort each situation: strong corroboration or illusory corroboration?
- Two sources diverge exactly where their interests diverge. What follows?
- Four independent chronicles agree on the size of an army. How much does the agreement add?
- Why is purposeless detail often the most trustworthy part of a document?
- Source criticism is the preliminary stage completed before the historical argument begins.
- Why is admitting what the evidence cannot settle a strength?