 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jan 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 620 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |   |
Last Wednesday, in reply to Ole, in the SR&S thread, I wrote,
"Now, academically, let me point out that by human nature, every person is biased. We are subjective by nature, there is no such thing as a truly "objective observer". Even every good set of scientific data must have it's "bias" calculated.
The questions to ask with each historian are: where is his/her bias?, how does he/she deal with it? and, how severe is it?"
(Yeeks, feels weird quoting myself).
Does this work for you?
And then comes the question, at which point does a bias become a notable bias?
(I liked being hidden in the shadows of the SR&S thread when it comes to this, but it just didn't jive with the other posts...)