How the history’s nature is defined?

History

is a

science

. When we elaborate on the term

history

as

s

cience we

Accept comma addition

science, we

mainly focus on the

fact

that

science

is the structured body of

knowledge

. It means

knowledge

is organized in a way that people can have an understanding. While being a

science

, in some resources

history

is defined as literature too. When

history

is called

science

, many can think of natural

science

.

However

,

this

is not the case in

history

. In natural sciences, scientists work on some issues deliberately and try to find out a solution.

Thus

, they experience the

process

of observation and experiment.

On the other hand

, even if historians observe and try to do some experiments,

this

will not

result

in any useful consequence. Because

history

deals with the past, neither changes nor adjustments can be made.

Consequently

, it is understood that

history

is a special

kind

of

science

that involves interference from general principles.

Additionally

, only through evidences historians may clarify the historical

process

. Any

kind

of observations and experiments are not a

ppropriated

Suggestion

appropriate

ways of looking at

history

. It is noteworthy to mention that

history

is r

esearch

Suggestion

researched

in the

process

. Here comes the question that what is the object of

history

? As each

science

has an

objective

,

history

also

looks for objects. The main object of

history

to look at is human actions that have taken place in the past. The way historians investigate the past depends on the

evidence

. When we say evidences there are i

ncluded all

Accept comma addition

included, all

of those historical documents. Historians try to find out proper

evidence

to

answer

things that have happened in the past. In essence, historical investigation relies on the interpretation of different kinds of evidences. If we refer to what Collingwood(

1

Accept space

(

980) said we can

claim

that

history

exists because humans should have who he is and what differentiates him from other people.

Consequently

, the

reason

why

history

exists is that self-

knowledge

plays a great role in once’ s life. As a notion

history

has main peculiarities which define it. The following paragraphs will be discussing them

in particular

.

Firstly

, in order to

claim

something, historians should have appropriate facts and evidences.

This

is the same feature that

history

has as other sciences. Historians are only allowed to

claim

something in case they have proper justifications to show themselves and

then

to the public opinion. In short,

this

is the feature of being inferential. Since

science

is the organized body of

knowledge

, the need to justify every single

claim

arises.

Hence

, historians are required to deliver deductive studies in order to

claim

any historical happening. Deductive reasoning is used by historians in order to come to a proper conclusion.

Moreover

, the way

history

is reasoned and its language plays a great role in making sure that readers get the most accurate mainly

objective

information in the specific area of

history

. In spite of the

fact

that

reason

and language v

ary

Suggestion

variation

variations

in the form they assist the reader to get

knowledge

, the essential purpose behind them is to ensure the

process

of

knowledge

exchange. To illustrate

this

point, what is crucial for a reader is to get unbiased truth,

however

, sometimes inevitably we can encounter the cases in which personal perspective prevents us from seeing the

objective

history

. Notably, here the being inferential peculiarity of

h

istory clarifies

Accept comma addition

history, clarifies

the situation. If the

historian

provides n

ecessary reasoning

Suggestion

the necessary reasoning

and interference, the objectivity of the facts is ensured. Indeed, claiming the

fact

that

knowledge

is inferential has the same meaning by saying the

knowledge

is organized.

Besides

, it is sometimes confused that memory is

also

a certain

type

of

history

.

Nevertheless

, it is clear from the above-mentioned facts that

this

statement is incorrect.

For instance

, if I remember something happened y

esterday

Accept comma addition

yesterday, this

this

is a memory statement.

However

, if I remember about the specific fight and I can provide essential evidences,

then

it became a historical statement.

Secondly

, the

next

point is about the

testimony

. As mentioned by Collingwood,

history

is autonomous. By saying that, it is meant that historical

evidence

and facts should not be under the obligation of someone else. To be a consequence of that, historians should be away from any

kind

of biased and intervened information.

For example

, even if someone who has

knowledge

about the happenings tries to interfere with the situation, historians should not accept that help. They are required to do the research

process

themselves and find out what is

objective

knowledge

. The

reason

is not because that person may lie or misdirect the

historian

. The real

reason

behind it is not to give up on the

historian

’s own autonomy over the work. If a

historian

agrees with the ready-made

answer

,

this

ready-made

answer

is called

t

estimony.

Suggestion

a testimony

And the person who prepares

this

answer

is called

t

estimony.

Suggestion

a testimony

As a

result

, the

historian

can be accused of forfeiting.

In contrast

w

ith

Suggestion

to

this

type

of

testimony

, the

historian

may benefit from the

testimony

which is clearly grounded o

n

Suggestion

in

the historical

evidence

. Only, in that case, historians can be away from forfeiting.

Furthermore

,

one

methodology

of

history

is scissors and

paste

types.

Firstly

, it is better to explain what we mean by scissors and

paste

types. In

this

type

of method, historians

firstly

think of what they want to learn or investigate. As a

second

attempt, they narrow down their r

esources to which is

Suggestion

resources which is

appropriate for their investigation.

Then

, they extract the important parts of others’ given interview, research or opinion. The

next

step is to reform it into the

historian

’s desired version.

For instance

, there can be cases in which the

historian

sees that the idea delivered by

one

author does contradict with others.,

thus

, the

historian

is able to incorporate or omit

one

of them. As a consequence of it,

this

type

is merely based on the

testimony

. According to Collinwood, it is better to call

this

type

of method as scissors and combine. Even though Collingwood goes on saying that

this

type

of

history

cannot be called as real

history

since it does not meet the required peculiarities of

science

, he highlights the

fact

that many people are using

this

type

now. Collingwood criticizes

this

type

of historians. By

this

, he tries to say that

one

should look at the meaning of happenings.

However

, in the scissors and

paste

methodology

historian

tries to make the

testimony

fit with the content. He emphasizes that only in the 17th century,

as a

result

of

science

reforms, historians started to establish new 2 movements.

Firstly

, they tried to make sure the credibility of a

uthorities.

Suggestion

the authorities

For

this

, they organized the systematic examination of authorities.

Secondly

, two new movements in the historical method now began. Historians began to view non-literary and literary resources as in the same importance.

Hence

, they started to utilize coins as historical evidences. The

first

movement d

id not totally change

Suggestion

has not totally changed

the situation with scissors and

paste

methodology

. Indeed, it made some changes in the content of scissors and

paste

methodology

.

As a

result

, the idea of critical

history

appeared.

However

, Collingwood notes that it was still considered as the

one

form of scissors and

paste

type

of

methodology

. İn

this

paper

initially

I started to write about how

history

is considered to be a

kind

of

science

. Many arguments have proven that

history

is organized

knowledge

.

Secondly

, why and how

history

is conducted were discussed in detail. Since humans need self-recognition,

history

is a crucial tool in that manner. Notably, historical evidences are the main tool used in the investigation

process

.

Moreover

, the paper goes on highlighting the features of

history

as notions which are the following; being inferential,

testimony

. In

this

phase, I have referred to Collingwood. He clearly introduced in his book

one

history

methodology

. In the final part of the paper, I tried to compare scissors and

paste

type

of

methodology

with modern

methodology

.