Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Do historians and human scientists have an ethical obligation to follow…
- Do historians and human scientists have an ethical obligation to follow the directive: “do not ignore contradictory evidence”?
Discuss with reference to history and the human sciences.
keywords
ethical obligation
A moral duty or responsibility to follow certain principles of right and wrong. In this context, it refers to the moral responsibility that historians and human scientists.
How do ethical obligations influence the methodologies employed in historical and human science research?
Ethical historians are obliged to evaluate their sources critically, verifying authenticity, reliability, and bias.
Ethical obligations push historians to include diverse viewpoints, especially from marginalized or underrepresented groups.
Ethical methodologies ensure that historians do not judge past events or people by today’s moral standards (presentism). Instead, they use contextual analysis to understand historical events within the norms and values of the time being studied.
-
How do ethical obligations impact the objectivity and neutrality expected of researchers in these fields?
Does having to respect certain cultural or moral considerations make it harder for a researcher to stay completely neutral?
Can ethical obligations sometimes conflict with the goal of remaining purely objective, especially when sensitive or controversial evidence is involved?
-
- history, this might include respecting the narratives of certain groups (like Indigenous peoples)
- human sciences, it might involve handling sensitive data or issues like privacy and consent.
-
contradictory evidence
What defines contradictory evidence, and how can it be identified in historical and human science research?
-
Does the presence of contradictory evidence undermine or enhance the robustness of a theory or narrative?
-
-
Is it ever justifiable to exclude contradictory evidence, and under what circumstances might this be acceptable?
In what ways does the inclusion of contradictory evidence contribute to a more nuanced understanding of complex issues?
information or data that conflicts with the existing understanding or theory, challenging the accuracy or completeness of that theory.
directive
-
To what extent should researchers adhere strictly to directives versus exercising personal judgment?
-
-
-
Can directives become outdated, and how should researchers respond to changing academic standards?
-
-
assumptions of the PT
ethical directives, such as "do not ignore contradictory evidence," can be effectively enforced or followed in academic disciplines.
-
directive to “not ignore contradictory evidence” applies universally across different fields of history and human sciences
contradictory evidence exists in most research situations, and that researchers will encounter it
following directives lead to more accurate, reliable, or ethical outcomes in research, and that failing to do so compromises the quality of knowledge.
engaging with contradictory evidence leads to more nuanced or comprehensive knowledge, as opposed to simply complicating the narrative or causing confusion.
-
-