Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Title #1:
Do historians and human scientists have an ethical obligation…
Title #1:
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.
KEY TERMS
Ethical obligation: A duty or moral responsibility to act in a certain way. In this context, the moral responsibility of historians and human scientists to act ethically.
The inherent moral duty to conduct work with integrity, honesty, and accountability in fields like history and human sciences.
when people who study history or humans are doing their work, they also have a responsibility—called an "ethical obligation"—to always be honest and fair, just like you should be. They need to do their work in a way that’s right
Directive: A specific order or instruction that must be followed. In this case, the instruction is to not ignore contradictory evidence.
An official or authoritative command that sets the standard for the practice of historians and human scientists.
Ignore: Deliberately disregarding or failing to pay attention to something. Ignoring contradictory evidence could mean avoiding conflicting data that challenges one's existing understanding or conclusions.
To intentionally overlook or reject evidence that might contradict or challenge existing beliefs or hypotheses.
When people ignore something, they don’t pay attention to it on purpose. In history or science, ignoring means not looking at something, even if it’s important or different from what you expect.
Contradictory evidence: Evidence that directly opposes or challenges the existing narrative or hypothesis. This term is crucial because it asks whether conflicting data should always be considered.
Data or facts that do not align with the prevailing narrative or established conclusions, challenging the coherence of the argument or theory.
SUB Q
-
-
When, if ever, is it acceptable to ignore contradictory evidence?
-
-
ETHICAL FRAMEWORK
-
Deontological Approach: The principle-based duty to always consider contradictory evidence, regardless of consequences.
Utilitarian Approach: The focus is on the greatest good. Is ignoring or acknowledging contradictory evidence beneficial or harmful to society?
Modern Scientific Community Ethics: Current norms in human sciences emphasize peer review and methodological rigor, making it unethical to ignore conflicting data.
Historical Ethics in Communities: Different eras and societies may have had their own standards for dealing with contradictory evidence.
Kantian Ethics: Ignoring evidence may violate the duty of intellectual honesty and the pursuit of truth.
Focus on actual evidence, not opinions or unverified claims.
-
Challenge: Identifying what counts as "evidence" rather than personal beliefs or speculative events.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-