FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-31-2007, 10:08 AM   #1
~M~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto.
Posts: 2,796
Default What makes a source reliable and what makes a proposition a historic fact?

Read the title and answer.
~M~ is offline  
Old 07-31-2007, 11:49 AM   #2
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

You need to do some background research on your own.

Historical_method (I haven't read it, but it might be a place to start.)

But it's best to avoid "historic fact." Scientists deal in facts. Historians deal in narrative, deconstruction, best explanations, and other such post modern concepts.
Toto is offline  
Old 07-31-2007, 12:03 PM   #3
~M~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto.
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
You need to do some background research on your own.

No, i do not. I am not asking because i am ignorant.
~M~ is offline  
Old 07-31-2007, 12:40 PM   #4
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Historical integrity (consistency) with respect to all the "evidence"
mountainman is offline  
Old 07-31-2007, 01:05 PM   #5
~M~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto.
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Historical integrity (consistency) with respect to all the "evidence"
is this all? just consistency? What evidence?
~M~ is offline  
Old 07-31-2007, 01:08 PM   #6
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~ View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
You need to do some background research on your own.

No, i do not. I am not asking because i am ignorant.
Please explain why you are asking this, and the context, or this thread can be deep sixed.
Toto is offline  
Old 07-31-2007, 01:41 PM   #7
Contributor
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~ View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Historical integrity (consistency) with respect to all the "evidence"
is this all? just consistency?
That is correct.
Over.

Quote:
What evidence?
In the field of ancient history evidence is generally acceptable
as citations to source authors and their texts, and any and all
archeological and/or scientific data (ie: citations again) that
is available to the research.

This includes architecture, art, sculpture, epigraphic inscriptions
and mosaics, graffitt, burial relics and sarcophagi, coins of all
denominations and content (gold, silver, bronze, etc), all forms
of pottery and etchings, frescoes, reliefs, archeological relics,
etc, etc, etc [this list is not definitive] and in addition those
scientific and/or traditional processes of analysis related to
the field of ancient history such as paleography
(handwriting analysis and dating), and carbon dating.

Does this help?



Pete
mountainman is offline  
Old 07-31-2007, 02:38 PM   #8
~M~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto.
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~ View Post


No, i do not. I am not asking because i am ignorant.
Please explain why you are asking this, and the context, or this thread can be deep sixed.


it was to introduce a relevant discussion topic that i wanted to discuss. go deep six elsewhere.
~M~ is offline  
Old 07-31-2007, 02:43 PM   #9
~M~
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto.
Posts: 2,796
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainman View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~M~ View Post

is this all? just consistency?
That is correct.
Over.

Quote:
What evidence?
In the field of ancient history evidence is generally acceptable
as citations to source authors and their texts, and any and all
archeological and/or scientific data (ie: citations again) that
is available to the research.

This includes architecture, art, sculpture, epigraphic inscriptions
and mosaics, graffitt, burial relics and sarcophagi, coins of all
denominations and content (gold, silver, bronze, etc), all forms
of pottery and etchings, frescoes, reliefs, archeological relics,
etc, etc, etc [this list is not definitive] and in addition those
scientific and/or traditional processes of analysis related to
the field of ancient history such as paleography
(handwriting analysis and dating), and carbon dating.

Does this help?



Pete
No it does not, pete. you are speaking of only one consideration for establishing historic facticity. The moment two different and competing propositions (or sources) are consistent with the relevant accepted claims, then your are in a truffle.

Do tell me this forum does have a firm grasp on the constitutives in establishing historic fact, eh? :
~M~ is offline  
Old 07-31-2007, 02:49 PM   #10
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Would you like to discuss this or just toy with us?

I think that historical researchers have an intuitive grasp of what is convincing, but I don't know of any official definition.

Please relate this to BCH.
Toto is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:33 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.