View single post by HankC
 Posted: Thu Jan 25th, 2007 02:36 pm
 PM  Quote  Reply  Full Topic 
HankC
Member


Joined: Tue Sep 6th, 2005
Location:  
Posts: 517
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 

  back to top


Any history book worth it's salt presents analysis based on the facts at hand, or at least those presented. Unluckily some choose to cherry-pick facts that support a pre-arranged analysis (or dogma?). DiLorenzo comes to mind, seeing only the moss in a stand of redwoods...

Perret's case is a different sort. Are the (incorrect) facts germane to the analysis? Does correcting the facts change the analysis?

If not, why are they included in the first place?

HankC

 Close Window