0
What part of the historian's argument references specific examples of historical evidence?
Based on this information, he argues that the French Revolution
produced far more negative outcomes than positive ones.
What else can I help you with?
Which historical term describes the specific primary and secondary sources that historians use to support their claims?
Historical evidence.
Which element is needed for a sound argument?
Evidence to support the argument is needed for a sound argument.
Which part of the historian's argument does not rely on any historical evidence?
In his opinion, it is morally wrong for any political movement to use any violence to achieve its goals
Can you substitute an analogy for other kinds of evidence to support points of an argument?
An analogy can be persuasive, or it can help people to understand your argument, but it isnt EVIDENCE.
Which type of evidence is most important in a persuasive argument?
the most important evidece in a persuasive argument is proof
Two arguments about a historical event contradict each other. How should historians determine which argument is superior?
Search for additional evidence to see which argument it supports.
How should historians determine which argument is superior if two arguments about an historical event contradict each other?
Historians should assess the evidence supporting each argument, consider the credibility of the sources, and evaluate the context in which the arguments were made. They may also look for consensus among other historians or seek additional evidence to support one argument over the other. Ultimately, the argument that is best supported by a preponderance of evidence and critical analysis is considered superior.
How do historians build and support their historical arguments?
Historians build and support their historical arguments by conducting extensive research, analyzing primary sources, and engaging with existing historiography. They use evidence to construct a coherent narrative and draw interpretations based on their findings. Additionally, historians explore multiple perspectives and possible explanations to provide a well-rounded argument.
What describes a historical argument?
A historical argument presents a claim based on evidence from historical sources and research. It aims to explain and interpret past events, often analyzing the causes and consequences of historical events or developments. Effective historical arguments are supported by strong evidence and critical analysis.
Which historical term describes the specific primary and secondary sources that historians use to support their claims?
Historical evidence.
Which method separates modern historians from ancient Greek historians?
Basing historical accounts on reliable evidence
What are techniques historians use when synthesizing evidence?
Comparing and contrasting historical sources
What are both techniques historians use when synthesizing evidence?
Comparing and contrasting historical sources
Why do historians look for evidence?
Historians look for evidence to support their understanding and interpretation of the past. Evidence helps validate their arguments, provide context, and support conclusions about historical events and figures. By examining various forms of evidence, historians can construct a more accurate and nuanced understanding of history.
What step must a historian take to evaluate historical evidence?
The steps historians take include studying the lives of ppl in different times and places is the work of the historians. The most basic tool for this work is historical evidence. Historians collect the evidence, then use it to interpret events. Historians look first at a primary source, first hand information about ppl or events or a secondary source that is stated after the fact.
What do historians have to do with the evidence they find?
Historians use the evidence they find to analyze and interpret the past, draw conclusions, and form historical narratives. They evaluate the reliability and significance of the evidence to construct well-grounded arguments about historical events and trends. Critical thinking and interpretation are essential skills historians utilize to make sense of the past based on the information available.
How should historians determine which argument is superior?
I have the feeling that your question may be part of a series of questions that were put to you. So there is a risk in giving an answer out of the context of your homework assignment. But generally speaking, the strongest argument in any historical debate will be the one where facts and assumed motives can be supported by contemporary factual and documentary evidence; the more, the better.
