E. H. Carr Believes Everyone Draws Their Own Conclusions in His Book, The Historian and His Facts, and Causation in History

I agree with the car idea in this article. Everyone has their own problems, it is difficult to insert their opinions in this history. I believe that some ideas will affect the event more than other ideas, but when I teach history, I can not insert my opinion. However, we believe that we need to talk about real history, we must have multiple perspectives and report all of these events to individual cases. If we do it, we can truly understand the event and be as close to talk as possible.

In the critique evaluation of the history research in the field, EH Carr 's article "History and fact, he gave it" Opinions about the limits of knowledge in historical research inherent in leaders and opinions on historians and historical I will explain the importance of the fact Fact of his / her relationship. Various historians in the nineteenth century and the early 20 th century, for example H. Carr's thesis of paradigm shift in historical research to E, shifted away from the academic arrogance of the past and erroneous premises, and wisely appealing Offers. He said that although some of the information does not make such history neutral, he still has no way to express the terms of his idea, as a fact that any beginner is easy to understand, common sense It may seem that it may have provided

Of course, if I read, "What is history?" The fact and attraction that I will be a fatal blow. Author: EH Car. Historical fact - No. 1 entitled "Historian and His Facts" In the chapter, he will introduce the most important tools for historians. In fact, he criticized the obsession of modern historians (his age). "The providence of God takes care of the fact, take care of the fact that it takes care of the fact", CP Scott's point of view, "The fact is that sacred advice is free .." EH Carr has been abandoned Not - he criticized Frank's history concept of all facts. But I do not believe that he will tell the facts

Karl tried to correct that the mistake of historical positivismism is the core of his view that fact alone alone does not explain the problem. Karl believes that being a historian of this task reservation historian can decide the order in which they are displayed, and the facts to present their background, as historians can choose. In fact, these facts must be screened for facts, interpretations and analysis in order to determine the relevance and value of their present and past knowledge in the past. From this point of view, the fact that history is basically considered to be composed of historians to create just as not found. This distinction between creation and discovery clearly has a major impact on the objectivity and reliability of facts, in particular due to the positivist clause, but considering historians, accepting the curls and history of this inherent limitation Part must: "Neutral history" can not. "