text:
User:LBird BASc/sandbox/ATK/Seminar7/History

Issue 1 - History

History of Anthropology
Introduction

Origin of Anthropology
- The origin of anthropology dates back to the work of Herodotus, a Greek historian, whose work is regarded as central to anthropology.

- During his travels, Herodotus gave detailed accounts of the customs of the people he observed, which are now seen as the first example of ethnography. - He started describing the different cultures of the Persian Empire, defining it as the dominant culture of the East, while Greece was the dominant culture of the West. - It was the beginning of cultural division and distinction.

- In the 14th century, the Arab historian Ibn Khaldun studied the diverse cultures of the Mediterranean with an objective, analytical, and ethnographic point of view. He presented a new scientific approach to examining civilizations. - Similar to the work of Herodotus, other explorers were also seen as crucial to our early understandings of the world, such as the works of Marco Polo.

Modern Anthropology

- Modern anthropology is argued to have developed during the Age of Enlightenment, during which scholars concerned themselves with understanding both human behaviour and society.

- During this period, however, anthropology was used largely to document the newly colonised lands and their people. The resulting studies, which are now viewed as racist, were used as a means of justifying colonisation by concluding that these societies were inferior to those of Europe. There is thus a dark history of anthropology, seeing as it grew and became recognised as a discipline greatly due to imperialism.

- Western countries turned to its colonies for labour, and even developed a slavery market. Thus, humiliating and dehumanizing people from different ethnicities.

- It was at this time that physicians started acting as physical anthropologists, and measured skulls of people from all around the world and provided detailed physical descriptions.

- Darwin's Evolutionary Theory played a big role in dispelling preconceptions.

- The 20th century anthropologists hugely criticised the theories from the previous century. They aimed to understand cultures in their own cultural context and not solely compared to the Western world.

- Instead, the 20th century anthropologists used participant-observation and ethnography to gain a greater grasp of societies at a given place or time. A further change has even been made within this discipline; ethnography is no longer only focused on the developing world but on the everyday life in the developed world as well.

Anthropology Today

- Technology has also played a large role in the emergence of new fields of study within anthropology. For example, the use of CT scanners to produce accurate images of the bones inside human remains in archaeology and biological anthropology.

- Genetics is another study that has greatly helped us understand our origins.

- An example of a contemporary anthropologist is Michael Wesch, a National Geographic Emerging Explorer, who is now exploring how we understand and interact with our new digital environment.

- Today, Anthropology has branched into four (even more) subcategories. The traditional anthopological research method is rarely used, as researches have shifted to culture studies.

Physical Anthropology

- Specialises in human biology, with a specific focus on evolution, primate behaviour, diversity and the relationship between biology and behaviour.

- Concerned with understanding the human condition through a variety of physical and biological factors.

- Interested not only in how evolution progressed but also the processes that underlie it.

- Study of diversity of people involves working with both fossils of hominins, the taxonomic tribe to which Homo sapiens belong, as well as nonhuman primates.

- Methodology includes measuring the frequency of particular traits within a group in order to understand how human populations are made up and to make predictions concerning their futures.

- Another technique commonly used by physical anthropologists is anthropometry, the gathering of precise measurements of the human body. It is through use of such data that physical anthropologists are able to understand the human population not only on a global scale but also an individual one.

- Just like the discipline to which it belongs, physical anthropology has a troubling history. Anthropometry, for example, was used in the late 19th century as a means of suggesting the differing levels of intellectual and cultural development of different ‘races’. Furthermore, the study of physical anthropology has previously been associated with eugenics, its research potentially being used to assist in the “possible regulation or improvement” of the human race.

Cultural Anthropology

- Arguable as to whether cultural and social anthropology are subsets of each other.

- Focuses on how culture varies between humans.

- Tylor is credited with defining a standard definition of cultural anthropology in his book “Primitive Culture”.

- Considered historically contentious as it was often used to justify colonialism and oppression of groups of people. Popularised the notion of the “self and other”.

- Has evolved considerably in post-colonial times, however racialised roots still exist in the theories and ideas propagated by cultural anthropologists.

- Attempts to define culture, and this definition has changed drastically over time. Also attempts to explore how culture develops in civilizations.

- Revolutionaries such as Boas started to shift the status quo away from making assumptions based on race.

- The discipline has expanded significantly during the latter half of the 20th century and has started focusing on how environmental factors affect and shape culture.

Anthropological Linguistics

- Traditionally focuses on languages of non-Western peoples, although this is no longer the sole interest.

- Interested in testing theories of language (usually developed from examination of European languages) as well as examining language use in social and cultural settings, including the effect language has in crafting these.

- One of the most important, ongoing debates within the field concerns the extent to which the structure of a language impacts its associated culture and vice versa.

- Unlike other forms of linguistics, anthropological linguistics looks for the cultural meaning behind language use.

- The field is divided into three distinct paradigms, each of which are still in use today:

- The first paradigm was established by the founding father of American anthropology Franz Boas and is solely concerned with documenting and classifying languages.

- The second paradigm arose in the 1960s and is concerned with analysing language in context.

- The third paradigm was developed in the 1980s and is focused on understanding culture from a linguistic perspective. As such, it is more closely related to anthropology as a broader discipline than the previous two paradigms.

Archaeology

- Analyses material and objects to provide an insight into culture and development of humans.

- Originated in Europe in the 15th and 16th century.

- Became a means for the social elite to showcase their wealth/status through finding and displaying rare objects and artefacts.

- Shifted to a national pursuit during colonialism when new cultures and lands were being captured.

- The first standard for the “archaeological method” was developed at the end of the 18th century.

- Even into the mid 19th century, archaeology was not considered to be a serious or academic discipline (still viewed mainly as a hobby or side-hustle).

- The exploration and evaluation of world wonders such as the pyramids helped to legitimise archaeology as an academic discipline in its own right.

- Considered to fall under both the humanities and social sciences, although due to technological innovation more and more scientific techniques are being used by archaeologists. Appears to be an interdisciplinary profession and domain.

- Archaeologists are required to use both descriptive and qualitative techniques to describe and define objects and artefacts as well as scientific methods to date and establish what they are made of / where they came from etc.

- The research undertaken by archaeologists has traditionally been collaborative, incorporating zoologists, geologists and researchers from other disciplines.

- It’s history (a pass time for scholars interested in the development of humankind) makes archaeology conducive to being an interdisciplinary profession / area. Scholars of different disciplines would work collaboratively and this means archaeology has grown as a field for people of a wide range of backgrounds and it encourages the use of interdisciplinary knowledge and understanding.

Climate Change
The issue of climate change first gained awareness in the academic realm from the potential warming effects of CO2 in the atmosphere, but has evolved into a contentious field where skeptics and politicians have battled activists and academics on how this unprecedented global challenge on the future of humanity can be tackled.

Discovery

 * In the lead up to the 20th century, Sweedish chemist Svante Arrhenius first recognised that the industrial-age coal burning will enhance the natural greenhouse gas effect, and fellow Swede Knut Angstrom found that minute changes in atmospheric CO2 concentration could significantly absorb a portion of the infrared spectrum
 * In 1938, Guy Callendar noticed that average temperature was rising from the previous century, and pointed to CO2 as a potential cause, but Guy’s finding was dismissed by meteorologists at the time
 * Roger Revelle showed that the ocean will not absorb all the CO2 emitted in 1957, and Charles David Keeling showed that atmospheric CO2 levels are rising in the following year

Political Developments

 * DiscoveryWhile modern scientists are generally encouraged to be apolitical, the issue has found its way into the political realm and dragged the academics who are trying to warn the world about the issue into it
 * DiscoveryA US President’s advisory committee warned that the matter was of "real concern" in 1965
 * DiscoveryThe issue made it into the UN’s first environment conference in 1972
 * DiscoveryThe Montreal agreement to limit CFCs was signed in 1987
 * DiscoveryPM Margaret Thatcher called for a global climate change treaty in 1987
 * DiscoveryThe Kyoto protocol and Paris accord was signed to limit greenhouses emissions in 1997 and 2016 respectively

Environmental History

 * DiscoveryGained momentum as a new field of study in the 1960s-70s
 * DiscoveryAgainst the backdrop of mounting evidence suggesting serious concerns about the environment and climate
 * DiscoveryFormed as an interdisciplinary subject that takes from a range of specialist fields in the natural sciences and humanities, including anthropology, geological history, and chemistry.

Technology

 * The study of the subject continues to evolve today with the advent and evolution of satellite and remote sensing technology
 * Indicators such as sea ice volume can now be measured on a scale that is far more accurately than what was possible half a century ago

Conclusion: the issue of History in relation to climate change

Throughout history the issue of climate change has never been as important as it is today because we are now in a state of environmental emergency. However, environmental science does not suffice in the explanation of climate change because, as this article shows, climate change is an interdisciplinary topic. Economics are involved because the mass-consuming, globalised and capitalist economic system in which we live is responsible for the progressive destruction of the environment and global warming. Social sciences are involved because understanding how society consume and relate to our environment is key to comprehending the climate crisis at hand and finding solutions. Finally, geology and climate sciences are pivotal in the scientific understanding of the topic.

Interdisciplinarity also makes the topic of climate change difficult because historically, knowledge is categorized, and disciplines have been separated. However, social developments and globalization make issues such as climate change impossible to tackle from the perspective of only one discipline. Global and social changes require approaches to knowledge to change in order to address interdisciplinary topics, therefore history becomes an issue and an obstacle because previous methods can become obstacles in modern day research and academia.

Philosophy and its evolution into separate disciplines
Philosophy can be translated from Greek as the 'love of wisdom', and its original purpose was to educate people on many different academic concepts as it dealt with all forms of knowledge. In the 19th century, the study of philosophy grew popular in new research universities, and as the disciplines became increasingly separate, philosophy also specialised. This meant that subjects such as psychology, sociology, linguistics and economics that were once studied exclusively by philosophers became subjects in their own right.

Philosophy and Science Nowadays, many scientists view philosophy as a totally unrelated discipline, with little to offer to the scientific method. Philosophy is thought to have an abstract, theoretical approach whereas science is based on empirical evidence. 'If the scientists were consulted, the majority of them would regard philosophy as one of the least important departments' (Frank 1957:xii).

 * However, many of the original philosophical theories were grounded in scientific thought, and many philosophers have contributed to important scientific discoveries.
 * The branch of philosophy which was especially concerned with science was known as natural philosophy.
 * Aristotle was one of the founding figures of natural philosophy, and his influence on biology and physical science was apparent for many centuries.
 * There were also scientific discoveries by famous philosophers which remain accurate and relevant in the present day. For example, Descartes created the Cartesian coordinate system which is still used in Maths. Additionally, Sir Isaac Newton, who came up with the laws of motion, had strong links to philosophy and during his life was viewed as a natural philosopher.
 * Galileo is another figure whose impact on the development of science as a discipline as well as natural philosophy is immense. Galileo's work introduced a new, alternative way of thinking about our world compared to Aristotelian classifications (including four terrestrial elements and one celestial element). Galileo instead proposed only one element: corporeal matter. This dramatic alternation did not only impact the development of science as a discipline but also our understanding of natural philosophy and how we conceptualize the world.
 * The distinction between science and philosophy as two different disciplines is a 'fairly modern phenomenon;' prior to this way of thinking, philosophy was key to comprehending and explaining the world. In fact, philosophy for hundreds of year was considered the 'science of sciences, their supreme ruler'.
 * Although science has clearly developed into its own discipline, and most scientists and philosophers now research independently of each other, there is an argument that the links between science and philosophy remain strong. Firstly, the theoretical approach favoured in philosophy is often useful in science. There are also areas of study where the two are more directly linked such as metaphysics and the philosophy of science.

Philosophy and Psychology

 * Psychology evolved out of Philosophy as its own discipline around the 1870s. Before this, it was viewed as a branch of philosophy, therefore, highlighting how interconnected their histories are.
 * Ancient Greek philosophers developed the 'psyche' theory, from which 'psychology' is derived. Some philosophers' theories still remain a crucial part of the modern psychological discipline such as Freud's id, ego and super-ego.
 * This interconnection is further demonstrated through how 'philosophy has brought various topics of study to the field of psychology, like sensation, perception, intelligence and memory'
 * Some argue that although these subjects are now viewed as two separate disciplines they are still interconnected. This is advocated by Quine who says 'I see philosophy not as a priori […] groundwork for science, but as continuous with science.'
 * This is shown through how they both still explore some of the same questions on the human mind and human behaviour.
 * However, the methodologies used by philosophers and psychologists differ owing to the more scientific nature of psychology. Psychologists rely on empirical and statistical approaches such as experiments and quantitative and qualitative research. Philosophers typically work in a non-empirical way, focusing more on conceptual theories and speculation.

Philosophy and art

Philosophy never gave a proper definition of art but is interested on the function of art. During Antiquity, the aim of art was to express beauty. Platon was reticent about it because he considered that it imitates the reality and was thus an illusion and a lie. Aesthetic reflection was thought, at first, by Platon in his thesis about what is esthetic and pleasant. The term esthetic comes from the grec aisthètikos, which signifies the perception by the senses. However, the notion of art as a proper branch thought by philosophy is recent. It was often assimiled to the notion of aesthetic, being the science of what is pleasant.

Aesthetic can be group in two ways : Creation and Aesthetic perception

If metaphysics is mainly interested in the phenomenon of creation, the aesthetics itself is mainly, especially since Kant, the judgment of taste or the feeling of pleasure.

Kant tried to develop the objectivity of art, by saying that what is beautiful is what please universally. Art function was thus to idealize reality. However, modern philosophers, especially Hegel separated art from the beauty saying that art does not have to be pleasant by authentic.

What is Biophysics
Biophysics is a modern, interdisciplinary field of science leading to new approaches for our understanding of biological functions. It is centred at the intersection of mathematics, physics, biology, engineering, pharmacology, physiology and chemistry. For example, a biological membrane, when the biological system is not simply the sum of its molecular components but rather their functional integration. Other examples include, how the brain processes and stores information, how plants use light for photosynthesis, how genes are switched on and off, how muscles contract, and how the heart pumps blood.

Overall, this new and exciting field uses and applies the theories and methods that have been traditionally 'belonged' to the field of physics in order to better understand how biological systems work. Molecules, cells organisms, and ecosystems are most often part of very complex systems. In short, biophysicists wish to dissect how these work to provide gain further understanding into the workings of the universe.

Origin of Biophysics
Although the term ‘biophysics’  has only relatively recently been utilised, some of the historic discoveries that lie within the boundaries of this field include: first law of thermodynamics, optical aspects of the human eye, theory of hearing, Brown’s motion, osmotic processes, non-equilibrium thermodynamics, and the discovery of X-rays (linked to the emergence of radiation biophysics).

Biophysics is only a relatively young branch of science. Even if the foundations for the study of this field were laid down in the early 19th century by a group of physiologists in Berlin, it only arose as a definite subfield in the 20th century. In 1856, one of the members of this group and Carl Ludwig’s student, Adolf Eugen Fick published the first biophysics textbook and developed the acclaimed and eponymous 'Fick's Law of diffusion'. However, in that time technology in physics and understanding of anatomy at the molecular level were not sufficiently advanced to be able to explain such theories. It was only in 1944, when the popularity and charisma of biophysics increased. This is the year when the Austrian Physicists Erwin Schrödinger published the book ‘What is life?’. After WW2, some physicists such as Schrödinger wanted to move away from ‘pure’ physics and into biology so it quickly gained impetus. .

The relatively recent increase in popularity and emergence of biophysics can be attributed, particularly, to the use of biophysical tools to unwind the molecular structure of DNA.

Early Biophysicists
Heraclitus 5th century B.C. – he worked on the earliest mechanistic theories of life processes and expanded the world’s insights into dynamic processes.

Epicurus 3rd century B.C. – he alluded to the idea that living organisms follow the same laws as non-living organisms. These ideas alluded to what discovered much later on: atoms.

Galen 2nd century A.D. – He is recognised as the most accomplished medical researcher and physician of the Roman period. His theories dominated western medicine for over a millennium.

Leonardo Da Vinci 16th century  – Some of his many conjectures and discoveries include mechanical principles of bird flight, known as bionics, which were later used in engineering design.

Giovanni Alfonso Borelli 17th century – Some of his most famous work related animals to machines and he began to use mathematics to prove his theories. He is considered to be the father of biomechanics. ‘De Motu Animalium’. This included comprehensive biomechanical description of limb’s mobility, bird’s flight, swimming movement, and heart function.

Current work in Biophysics
Some of the work that is currently being carried out by biophysicist includes: working to find methods that aid in the eradication global hunger and treatments of disease, develop renewable energy sources, and design pioneering and cutting-edge technology, to name a few.

History of Law
The evolution of law is not marked in time, it begins with the discovering of writing in 3000 before Christ et know many changes through time. The history of law is thigh to the history of civilization. Ever since humans created societies characterised by a social hierarchy, symbolic communication forms and separation from the natural environment, an established set of rules used to govern behaviour has existed.

The existence of first laws

First Mediterranean civilisations were born in Egypte and Mesopotamia. The first known marks of laws dated back to the 30th century before Christ when ancient Egyptians established a set of civil codes based on social equality and impartiality and to the 18th century before Christ when King Hammurabi developed Babybolian law to unify its population. During this era, law was very inspired by religion as it was considered as revealed by the gods.

The base of nowadays laws

Roman Antiquity is really an essential starting point of nowadays laws as it funded the structure of our law. Roman law was a reflect of the dynamic nature of society. In the 5th century, the law of the Twelve Tables were written as a Constitution of the Roman Republic to frame the population and informed public legislation. During the 8th century before Christ, Ancient Greece was the first civilization to instaure democracy. By the inclusion of its citizens, the process of laicization of law occurred. Solon’s reform opened the assembly to every grec citizen and created the first tribunal. Law began to be a proper object, isolated of religion, moral and philosophy and to be more and more spread. Many scholars appeared, next to a proper specialist of law : the Jurisconsults.

The decomposition of law

During the 9th century, the notion of State disappeared attracting law with it. In fact, law knew a big step back, as it lost its autonomy especially its autonomy facing religion. Moreover, written laws and codes disappeared to let place to case law and tradition during the Dark Ages.

The renewal of law

During the 11th century, the legal profession reappeared. Law gained back its autonomy from religion. First law schools appeared as the University of Bologna which served as a model for other law schools of the medieval age.

The establishment of nowadays laws

During the 19th century, Constitution and codes began to be written and established a formal law to regulate society. As a matter of fact, fermanic and Napoleonic codes, who was written in 1894, became the most influential and make up the majority of European law today. Moreover, The US legal system is largely based on the English common law system. Finally, The Law Society in London was formed to raise the law profession’s reputation and set standards to ensure good practice initially across London, later the whole of the UK, and eventually throughout Europe.

References:

History of Art: philosophical influences

What is art? According to some, it is what distinguishes humans from other animals. It is therefore no coincidence that art found its roots in philosophy, the most human subject: Descartes’ “Cogito Ergo Sum”. Let´s start by defining some of the main pillars of art: debate and conflict, truth (does art have to be truthful), distracting the spectator. In fact, philosophic studies greatly influenced these three pillars. Art´s relationship to truth is very important. It has always known some guidelines, explaining censorship under many monarchies during the 17th century and even before for example. Philosophers first introduced these guidelines around 400 BC, like Plato and Aristotle. Plato thought that art had to be truthful; it had to reflect the reality of things. This was because he found that art was a copy of life and its most ordinary events. This motivated him to criticize Homer´s works L´ Iliad and the Odyssey. In his work, Homer describes the battle of troy, with Achilles as its main character who is supposed to be a demi-god. However, during the battle, Patrocles, Achilles´ cousin dies, infuriating him and causing him to be perceived as weak emotionally. According to Plato, this is not the attitude expected of a demi-god. He therefore believed that this work couldn´t and shouldn´t be seen as art. This led to some guidelines that art introduced and followed over the ages. Some arts wouldn´t follow these, leading to their undermining. Debate is a vital part of philosophy, and it led to being a vital aspect of art. According to Descartes, debate through doubting everything, the cogito is the key to being familiar with the truth in various topics. Debate, especially the one over whether an art is beautiful or not, is important in art as it leads to the creation of new arts. During the 19th century, there were two distinct salons for artists (painters) to expose their creations. One was for the art that was considered beautiful (the “beaux arts salon”) and respectful of the guidelines set for art back then. The other salon was reserved for the works of artists who failed this examination: it was called the salon of the rejected. This didn´t stop the artists of continuing exploiting what they found beautiful through their art. In an ironic turn, these rejected artists became the most well known in the future – they were seen as revolutionary both in their technique and in the subject they exploited. One of the most well known French painters was a “rejected”, Edouard Manet. One of the main reasons art came to exist was its capacity to distract the spectator from his ordinary life. Philosophy led to main uses for art: art to educate and art to distract. Aristotle is one of the most important influencers of art to instruct. He thought that art could be a way to show the spectator some of his own repressed feelings or inner desire and see the outcome of it. This led to his famous catharsis role of theatre: theatre must show what the spectator wants the most and remove this desire at the same time by showing the tragic outcome it would lead to. This idea of taking pleasure and being terrified at the same time was used centuries later, with Moliere for example. This famous comedy-play writer followed the philosophy of placere e docere: enjoy and learn. In fact, he distracted many of their ordinary lives through his comedies, and showed strong criticism about human behaviour and society at his time. For example, he showed how greed was a human flaw through a comic play.

History of Levi's jeans - a clothing adopted by all classes and genders

 * 1873 : The first users were workers, miners, cowboys and gold diggers. The trousers were known to be hard-wearing, comfortable and sold to an affordable price. Seems perfect right? Except that this clothing item was only worn by men who belonged to the working class. When Levi Strauss first introduced his signature trousers, he definitely didn't have women in mind.

 * During World War 1 : many women engaged in physical labor for the first time to fulfil the duties of men who had been shipped off to combat. Levi's jeans became an essential piece in their wardrobe. In 1918, Levi's introduced a line of women's garments called "Freedom-Alls", which were one piece garments that consisted of cotton tunics connected to balloon pants.
 * In the 1920s and 1930s, Hollywood presented a romantic vision of blue jeans, worn by handsome dark cowboys, including John Wayne and Gary Cooper.
 * 1934 : Levi's introduce the first line of women's jeans. Known as Lady Levi's, the jeans altered men's cuts to better fit the female form. Most importantly, as Paneck points out, Levi's introduced these at a "time when women's pants were still largely unaccepted," making this a relatively bold move in the clothing industry.
 * After WW2 : denim clothing became more and more accepted by the American society and were considered a leisure clothing attire. Jeans became a symbol of the "American way of life" trend, it became more and more popular all around the world. Due to societal changes in the Western world women wearing pants became a norm they were associated to suburban moms.
 * During the 50's, jeans became a symbol of rebellion. "Hollywood costume designers put all the bad boys in denim". Brought to the cinema by actors like James Dean in the movie Rebel without a cause (1955) or Marlon Brando in The Wild One (1953). Lynn Downey a historian of Levi Strauss and Co said : "if you were a 15-year-old boy in 1953 you wanted to be Marlon Brando". Who doesn't want to look like their icon ? Jeans became the uniform of all teenagers boys and girls. Banned from school because they represented "bad boys", teenagers are drawn to them for their rebellious side.
 * During the 60's, young people looking for change in society demonstrate their solidarity to the working class by wearing jeans. They would draw on them, sew patches, and customised them to get their messages across. They become the favourite clothing of the protest with the hippie movement (Woodstock concert) and of all of those who identify themselves as part of the "counter-culture" movement.
 * Today, it is official literally everyone wears jeans whatever it social background is. It becomes a standard of casual and relax clothing. Jeans became a clothing item worn by all, men and women, older and younger making it a sartorial symbol of gender equality and class.


text:
User:LBird BASc/sandbox/ATK/Seminar7/Truth

Issue 2 - Truth

Is there Objective Truth in History?
Since history is a very facts-driven discipline, it would be natural to assume that there is objective truth within it. After all, there are some historical truths that seemingly cannot be disputed such as:

 * William the Conqueror won The Battle of Hastings in 1066.
 * In 1605, the gunpowder plot was a failed assassination attempt by a group of English Catholics against King James the first.
 * The holocaust of World War Two led to the murder of millions of Jews.

However, even an event as well documented as the holocaust is still questioned by certain groups of people. Holocaust deniers dismiss all claims that the Jews were purposefully persecuted during World War Two or that the Nazis were in any way directly responsible for their deaths. They claim that the official Nazi reports documenting the murders were forged by people working for 'world Jewry'. The fact that some of these deniers, such as the British historian David Irving, have been jailed for trying to spread their views shows that despite some doubt, the atrocities and existence of the holocaust is viewed by most as an objective fact which should not be challenged.

Consequently, it seems to be unquestionable that historical facts do exist. This leads us to consider whether facts can be considered as synonymous to 'truth'. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a truth is 'a fact or belief that is accepted as true'. If we follow this definition, it would seem fitting to accept an event such as the Holocaust as an objective truth. Therefore, some events in history must be considered objective truths. Whether these facts and events are portrayed accurately is another issue.

How Reliable is "Objective Truth" in History
History concerns itself with the study of the past, one which could not be replicated, and could therefore only be studied through proxies. These include both primary ones like first hand accounts, and secondary ones such as studies on particular events. While some positivists would argue that this would sufficiently inform historians about the past, as they would be able to reason and piece together the facts that forms the basis of their arguments, and put together a narrative; proxies are intermediaries, and win this case, non-replicable intermediaries. This leaves room for the perceived facts to be picked apart and challenged, no matter how convincing it may initially seem. As such, like statisticians, historians are inherently bound to accept some degree of uncertainty, just without a p-value attached to it. They coexist with uncertainty in their facts, biases, and agendas; and create work that tries to better understand history with these issues in mind.

Moreover, historical facts are interpreted and yet also presented as truth by historians. A marxist historian who believes that the Nazis have risen as a form of proletariat revolution, and the German people were betrayed makes value judgements that may be deemed totally invalid, yet others would consider it a school of thought to be given the same consideration as Jewish perspectives on the rise of Nazism being a result of anti-semitism. In this regard, what is considered valid and true in history lacks objectivity, and perhaps arguably, is rather arbitrary.

While many events have happened in the past, not all are given the same importance, and considered part of history. James Everest may have had a jolly ol' adventure in SOAS to explore their basement 20 years ago, while Christopher Columbus had one in the Americas 400 years ago. Yet while both are undoubtedly adventures, only the latter was recorded and studied in history. This shows how History selects its truths, sometimes with seemingly arbitrary criterion, and would be hard-pressed to claim itself objective.

A quintessential example of History's seemingly arbitrary whims would come more than familiar to feminists, as history focuses on the physical battles in warfronts, where a predominantly male experience is recorded in detail that are sometimes down to the second, while the predominantly female experiences of life and the impact of war back at the belligerent countries are ignored. While the records can be objectively true and impartial, it would be difficult to say that the history has been written objectively due to the biases and agendas that are embedded within the selection of facts.

Truth in Art
The Bayeux Tapestry depicts the events leading up to and including the Battle of Hastings, which resulted in the conquest of England by William, Duke of Normandy in 1066. It is a 70 meter long piece of embroidery that was commissioned by a Norman patron. Because the commissioner was probably a Norman patron, many scholars originally believed that the work showed a pro-Norman account of the Conquer of England. However, an opposing view has been argued by scholars including Andrew Bridgeford:

“I would argue that the Tapestry is designed to please a Norman audience at a superficial level, while at the deeper level, it tells the same story as that put in writing by Eadmer of Canterbury: there are subtle pictorial clues throughout the work that consistently undermine the Norman version of events.”

Even though the Bayeux Tapestry was described as a “unique piece of pictorial evidence of one of the most important turning-points in early medieval history and western civilization: the Norman Conquest,” the noticeable and subtle forms of subjective storytelling obscure the true details of the event.

Censorship and Truth in Education
Censorship plays a huge role in the omission of truth in the study of history, especially regarding education. Censorship can thus be seen as a governmental tool to create an “official historiography” of a country, which in turn is used to push political agendas or to portray their nation in a solely positive light.

One example is that of the Japanese history textbook controversy. The government approved textbooks hugely downplay the Japanese aggression and war crimes during WW2. This is seen as a nationalist attempt to whitewash the Japanese actions during this time.

Although Japan can be seen as distorting the truth, the Japanese nationalists view that they have in fact apologised for their actions and that the Chinese textbooks are in fact guilty of presenting themselves as faultless in their side of history. Truth in the history of wars can thus be viewed as subjective depending on which side one was on, yet the number of fatalities and the stories of the victims of war are undoubtedly objective.

The use of censorship is not, however, always as evident. In Texas, a state in a seemingly democratic country, textbooks have been seen to devalue the role of slavery in the American Civil War. This use of censorship, to hide the darker side of one’s history, is unfortunately difficult to tackle as the Board of Education argues that they do not view certain aspects as pertinent to the curriculum.

Finding the Truth in Historical Sources
Owing to the nature of historical sources, their content cannot be taken to be objective truth. Sources include a mixture of bias, truth and hopes which therefore only provide one viewpoint on the history being analysed. By looking at a mixture of sources it is possible to get closer to an objective truth however it is arguably still subjective as the person looking at these sources creates their own narrative of what they believe happened, inevitably projecting their own opinion. These sources are still useful as they provide a different kind of truth such as society’s beliefs and dreams.

Some historians create differing narratives of history from the same sources highlighting how influential opinion is in creating ‘historical truth’ and that some areas of history cannot be seen as objective.

Even archaeological evidence, which some might view as objective evidence, can hold bias. For example, the stereotypical view of the Vikings is that they were violent barbarians. The preservability of certain materials plays into this truth as weapons made of high quality steal or even iron can survive until now whereas objects used in everyday life were predominantly made of wood meaning that they quickly decomposed. Therefore, only looking at archaeological evidence in this case would reveal one small aspect of Viking life, violence, and not reveal the whole truth.

Hallucinations and the issue of truth
A hallucination occurs when, in the absence of external stimuli, an individual’s perceptions are significantly altered. A very strong and compelling sense of reality is felt by such individuals. The question of whether or not there is truth in this 'perceived reality' has several differing answers, depending on the perspective or discipline that is employed to examine it.

 What is the issue regarding truth and hallucinations?:

Hallucinations come from within one's mind, therefore objectivity regarding the subject can be difficult to achieve as the existence of hallucinations is based solely on a person's personal experience. As with all topics, there are different ways of approaching the subject of hallucinations, while a positivist view would present the chemical reality and a clinical psychological interpretation of the matter and an interpretive view a more person-centred explanation, it is also possible to look at hallucinations as a product of culture and social construct.

 Chemical Reality:

Hallucinations can occur within a very wide range, which extends to the five sensory modalities (namely sight, touch, smell, taste and hearing), however, the most frequently experienced ones are visual and auditory hallucinations. A recent study carried out at the University of Oregon found that after administering mice with a dose with a similar chemical structure to LSD, the mice experienced reduced activity in their visual cortex. This suggests that whilst there may not be 'truth' behind the perceived reality of the hallucination, there is, in fact, an empirical reality in the chemical, physiological and neurobiological natures of such experiences. The visual cortex is located at the back of the brain. It is responsible for processing all the information that is taken in by the eyes. This mechanism provides some evidence to possibly explain the genesis and chemical reality of hallucinating. For example, seizure activity in the brain can cause irritation in the cortical centers, which may lead to the development of hallucinations.

A distinction must be made between hallucinations and illusions. The latter being misperceptions of real external stimuli. Essentially, hallucinations are seeing, hearing, feeling, or smelling something that is real but which are given an incorrect interpretation by the brain. On the other hand, true hallucinations do not include such incorrectly interpreted stimuli. Hypnagogic experiences are unusual perceptual experiences that often occur while dreaming, falling asleep, or waking up. These false perceptions include vivid dreaming or lucid dreaming. In summary, real hallucinations are mainly experienced as symptoms of either medical, neurological, or mental disorders (e.g. epilepsy or schizophrenia).

Certain recreational drugs can also induce hallucinations. The most frequently used drugs include amphetamines, cocaine, hallucinogens, lysergic acid, diethylamide, LSD, phencyclidine (PCP), cannabis, and marijuana. Visual hallucinations (sometimes referred to as lilliputian hallucinations), whereby individuals report false perceptions of animals or other individuals, have been closely linked to substance use. Withdrawal syndromes that arise from drug abuse have also been associated with this type of hallucination. For instance, withdrawal from alcohol, sedatives, hypnotics, and anxiolytics.

This suggests that overall there is some form of truth in hallucinating, even it is not apparent at first. The chemical alterations in your brain provide real, empirical evidence that a disruption of brain chemistry has occurred. Hence, hallucinations are symptoms of irregular brain activity and from this perspective can be considered to be true.

Mental wellbeing:

In terms of medical illnesses and wellbeing, genuine hallucinations have been most closely linked to delusion. If someone experiences a hallucination in the absence of such a mental illness there is a higher index of suspicion (that the hallucination is in fact, fake).

 Cultural influences on hallucinations:

According to Stanford anthropologist Tanya Luhrmann, hallucinations differ depending on the patients' cultural and social environment. The approach in treating the patients in different places would also have an impact on hallucinations. Professor Luhrmann's research underlines an important issue in the treatment of mental illness in society, a univocal view of hallucinations as a clinical problem is not beneficial for patients as other factors influencing the origins of these symptoms are being overlooked. Tanya Luhrmann stated that ““The work by anthropologists who work on psychiatric illness teaches us that these illnesses shift in small but important ways in different social worlds. Psychiatric scientists tend not to look at cultural variation. Someone should, because it’s important, and it can teach us something about psychiatric illness”. Professor Luhrmann and other academics conducted a research project in which they interviewed 60 adults from places in the USA, India and Ghana who had been diagnosed with schizophrenia . The subjects were asked whether their auditory hallucinations were overall positive experiences or whether the voices were negative and violent. The Ghanaian and Indian subjects mostly assessed their conversations as positive, they talked to family members and divinities sometimes whereas all the Americans reported violent and harmful interactions. What may serve as an explanation of this is that in the US, hallucinations and schizophrenia is treated as a clinical dysfunction and is subject to social taboo. On the other hand, in non-western civilizations, the idea of spirits is more culturally accepted and socially, self-identity does not outweigh the collective as it does in western cultures. Therefore, Luhrmann's research shows cultural environment has in impact on hallucinations and therefore one definition, one truth, does not suffice in the treatment and understanding of hallucinations.

C onclusion:

Looking at hallucinations as influenced by culture presents some truth. However, if hallucinations are a product of our society and culture, we can question whether the scientific approach to understanding and treating hallucinations and the chemical reality explained in this article is the only truth. If external factors such as cultural influences (and the emotional state of the patient) can influence hallucinations then we can conclude that there is not one truth in the understanding of this subject, a positivist, constructivist or interpretative approach does not suffice. The issue of truth within disciplines is apparent as no truth is universal in the understanding of hallucinations.

Introduction

 * When asked how they feel about photography, people often consider a photo to be reflective of reality.
 * This is not the case, photography is an art form and just like any art, can be manipulated.
 * There are technical aspects from other disciplines (most notably physics) that also play a part in how photography can represent truth.
 * Manipulation, framing, context, editing and many other factors can influence how objectively true a photograph can be.
 * Photography is a powerful tool of expression, communication that offers a variety of interpretations and perceptions.

Objective Truth

 * Roland Barthes notes that a photography is not a lesser form of reality: “It is not at all necessary to break down this (photographic) reality into units and to constitute these units into signs substantially different from the object they represent the image is not the reality, but at least it is its perfect analogon, and it is just this analogical perfection which  defines the photograph.”
 * Photography is a representation of reality. It was invented to catch details and to be the most accurate to reality
 * Photography has often been use as a way to expressing and denouncing reality as it shows reality as it truly is. Many photographers, as Robert Capa for example took pictures of war to show the reality of its and to reveal the truth of this horrific acts.
 * Moreover, photography has often been used as a historical proof of marking events. Since the invention of photography each marking event is captured to let a permanent illustrated proof, which stays in mind
 * Lange-MigrantMother02.jpggraphy sometimes catchs a reality that we are missing at the naked eye, as for instance, a look, an emotion, a call for help. A photography that show the suffering and questioning and fears through a look is Migrant Mother, by Dorothea Lange, in which the look of the women reveals her sad reality and preoccupation, a look that was captured and that may have not been picked up if not captured.

Subjective Truth

 * Photography captures a moment, but a moment may not be enough to inform the viewer of the context or narrative behind what is being captured.
 * For example, a photo of a sailor kissing a woman. Many assume them to be lovers, however this requires a lot of assumptions to be made on behalf of the viewer. How do we know the relationship between the two subjects from this photograph? Do they know each other? What are the events leading up to this photo? Looking at truth from a qualitative and inquisitive perspective may be required and viewers should be skeptical. A relativist approach is important.
 * How is it framed? The photographer may be using a certain composition to lead your eye in a certain way. They may be trying to emphasise certain elements or tell a narrative but how do we know this narrative is true?
 * A photograph may not be enough to depict emotion. The temporal element of emotion is lost when you take a photograph.
 * Has the photograph been edited or adjusted in any way? Post processing allows one to alter reality entirely, distorting or creating an entirely new reality. Lens choice can also distort reality, creating fake perspective or optical illusions that may not be representative of truth.
 * Photography also modifies and influences the true and instant reality. Indeed, Roland Barthes notes that the human subject can be made less real through the process of being photographed. He notes, "Once I feel myself observed by the lens, everything changes: I constitute myself in the process of 'posing', I instantaneously make another body for myself, transform myself in advance into an image."
 * Photographs can be easily manipulated in the darkroom, as did famous photographer Man Ray

Photography as Manipulative Tool

 * Photography, like all forms of art, has historically been a key tool utilised to influence the opinions of the masses.
 * Due to the propensity of modern humans to unquestioningly accept photography as a form of objective truth it has been seen as the perfect tool for propaganda by both democratic and authoritarian governments.
 * This can be clearly illustrated by examining two case studies from the 1930s, one from Germany and the other the United States:
 * In Germany, the Nazi Party were utilising photography to promote anti-semitism amongst the population. A key example of this is The Eternal Jew, an exhibition held in Munich from 1937-38 featuring 265 unappealing images of Jews. It was attended by approximately half a million people and was reported to have corresponded with a significant rise in violence against Jews.
 * Through this, we see a prime example of what philosopher Susan Sontag spoke of as the ability of photography to ‘murder’ people by removing their humanity; those featured in the exhibition had no say in the way in which they were depicted.
 * Meanwhile, in America images of the dire conditions in rural areas of the country following the Great Depression were being utilised in an attempt to improve support for Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal programs. In order to achieve their political goal, only unappealing scenes were chosen as the subjects of these photographs.
 * US government photographers were instructed not to stage their photographs but, as Kathleen Collins notes, the presence of a camera almost always results in a change of a subject’s behaviour. This was highlighted by Dorothea Lange, the photographer behind the highly influential ‘Migrant Mother’ image, who revealed that “[the mother] seemed to know that my pictures might help her, and so she helped me” by behaving in a particular way.
 * From these examples, it is clear to see that all photography inherently involves the manipulation of reality, whether conscious or not, and as such can be a highly powerful persuasive tool.

Truth in Psychoanalysis, a "science" or not

Come the 20th century, science gained a new angle of vision in viewing the human species. Indeed, with the birth of the movement of psychoanalytic psychology, humans were seen as being more complex than previously thought. The two major figures in this movement were Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung who shared and were divided on certain aspects. Both being authoritarian dogmatic people, their refusal of the theories other than theirs leaved this new science being little credible. Indeed, the element of truth in this subject was thoroughly debated by many. It was at first not even recognized as a science. Theoretically, a science is founded once it is given a method. However, in the case of psychoanalysis, no real method was given. It relied mainly on therapy, leaving this science mostly based on theories that had not been proved using a method. There was therefore no real evidence in any theory suggested by Freud or Jung, leaving this science weak with few followers compared to other sciences. Future theories will fail to bring the spotlight back again on this science as it will fail to be based on reproducible scientific experiments. In fact, Peter Fonagy, a psychoanalyst said himself that “the evidence base for psychoanalytic therapy remains thin”. This is delicate as therapy and modern medicine requires hard evidence. The only evidence Fonagy found was based on short-term psychodynamic psychotherapy (which cannot be generalized to long term psychodynamic therapy) – brief therapy differs however from classical psychoanalysis, leaving this evidence thin.

Let´s focus this study on two main areas of study: child development and the human mind.

Child Development

Freud saw children under the Oedipus complex, urging them to kill the same sex parent and have sex with the opposite sex parent. This means that children are sexual beings from birth. Is there any truth in this theory however? Freud saw children under the Oedipus complex, urging them to see the same sex parent as a rival and have sex with the opposite sex parent. This means that children are sexual beings from birth. Is there any truth in this theory however? Obviously Freud didn’t get this theory whilst analysing children having sex with their mother or father. He rather, for example, separated participants according to gender, then again divided into three groups: participants in each group read some backstory about a character of their sex. One condition, the “oedipal loser”, the participant is a 6 year old child who walks in on his/her parents having sex. Another, the “spousal betrayal” implies the participant being an adult walking on his/her spouse having sex with another person. The final one, “control” the participant is a college student who walks in on his/her roommates making breakfast. The participants then had to give their attitude towards pornography. Regarding the “control” participants, men were seen having more interest in pornography than the women. However, the “oedipal loser” and “spousal betrayal” men participants were seen having little interest in it, similarly to the women. Freud concluded that the child aged between 3-6 is attracted to the opposite sex parents and sees the same sex parent as a rival. Fearing castration from the same sex parents, the child starts imitating the same sex parents. Thus, Freud gained support for his theory he claimed to be universal, about a child’s sexuality: the Oedipus complex. It encountered opposition rapidly. In 1929, polish anthropologist Malinowski demonstrated that in a situation where the father of the child is the mother’s lover and not its model (disciplinarian), the father son relationship was healthy. Another issue was that there was only one child case study: the case of Little Hans in 1909. Hans’s father even was a supporter of Freud’s theory, leaving this theory less and less credible. So overall, this theory contains some truth but has never found enough solid evidence to be applied universally. In fact, Freud overemphasized the libido influence.

The Mind

.

How can we define "truth"?

 * Truth is a match between what is said and what is. A statement is true if it corresponds to reality.
 * Things are real or not but it is the judgment that I have on the thing that is true or not.
 * Truth can be seen as an objective way to see and tell reality

Truth according to Platon
Common sense takes for real what is immediately perceptible (eyesight, hearing, touching, ...) in other words "the sensitive world" that we can tell by our senses. Nevertheless, I know that my eyesight can be mislead so until when can I say that my senses can tell me the truth.

Platon, an athenian philosopher in Ancient Greece, wrote in his oeuvre La République his vision about truth. To illustrate his thesis he decided to use an allegory, the cave allegory. Envision human figures living in an underground cave with a long entrance across the whole width of the cave. Humans have been here since their childhood and have their legs and necks chained so they cannot move and can only see what is in front of them. Above and behind them, a fire is blazing to distance they see only their own shadows that the fire throw on the opposite wall of the cave. Between the fire and the prisoners, there is a raised way with a long wall that is used as a screen where puppets player show their puppets. They only see the shadows of the objects that are shown. To them the truth would be literally nothing but the shadows of the images.

Platon distinguish two worlds :

 * The "sensitive world" : knowledge by opinion, a reality that mislead, relativism, subjectivism, knowledge based on appearances (the cave)
 * The "perceivable" world : eternal, unchangeable, knowledge by essence, immaterial, (reality)

What we understand from this allegory is that we must detach ourselves from the sensitive world, because it is a poor, illusionary and fake knowledge.

The allegory compares the soul to a chained prisoner and the goal of this allegory is to show how human beings unchain themselves from the sensitive world to rise up to the contemplation of the "idea". The exit of the cave represents the rise of the soul towards the perceivable. There is a parallel between the alienation of the chained body and the alienation of the mind. The man is characterised as a puppet (doesn't know how to control itself, can't move by itself). Need something from outside to move.

There is two possibilities to exit the cave :

 * 1) The prisoner goes out alone, he is blinded by the sun, it hurts his eyes and so he decides to go back to the world that he knows. Here, Platon criticises a sudden education.
 * 2) The prisoner goes out with a philosopher. Proceed to a step-by-step education, he learns how to look at the sun, how to get used to luminosity. The philosopher is seen as a doctor who heels the souls.

The truth does't reside in sensations, it is made of unchangeable concepts that can only be thought of. Truth is designed and thought of, it can't be touched or seen, it can be reached only through the mind.

Platon seeks to put forward the universality of truth vs the particularity of opinions. To know we must free ourselves from prejudices and preconceptions.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
User:LBird BASc/sandbox/ATK/Seminar7/Evidence

Issue 3 - Evidence

Historical Evidence
Evidence is key to the study of history, as it helps historians draw conclusions about past events. Arguably, sources are the 'data' of historians, but they only become evidence when they are interpreted/analysed to make sense of the events they are describing. In this way, history can be considered a science, with its own form of hypotheses and data to prove them.

There are several different types of sources :

 * Primary sources - which consist of information written/created at the time the studied event took place by the actual people involved (e.g. diary entry from a soldier)
 * Secondary sources - these are typically a commentary/analysis by a historian of the event as understood by other primary sources. As they are often created a while after the event has occurred, they are not regarded as useful as primary sources. Often consist of book or magazine articles.
 * Oral history - these are stories which are passed down from generation to generation, but are never written down. They are common when studying old tribes or ethnic groups who do not have much written documentation of their history. They are generally less accurate than written sources, as when stories are transferred through so many generations, they are likely to be altered or exaggerated.

In fact, with all historical evidence it is important to consider the context in which that evidence was created. It is likely that the creator had some bias which perhaps reduces the accuracy of the source. For example, a patriotic German, even if they are not a Nazi supporter, may be likely to write a book (secondary source) which does not fully divulge the atrocities committed under Hitler's rule and is likely to portray Germany in a more positive light than it merits. Evidence must not be taken as an objective truth.

Positivism versus Interpretivism
Positivism and interpretivism are two very different approaches sociological study and research. On the one hand, the former is often associated to a traditional 'scientific method' and the latter postulate that our knowledge of the world is 'socially constructed'.

Positivism
Firstly, positivists believe that hypotheses, conjectures and theories can be generated and tested, often using empirical evidence and/or direct observation. Overall, positivists are more likely to use quantitative research methods by analysing a study using statistical methods (overall a clear alignment to the natural sciences). They deem their approach to be generalised, representative of the population, reliable, trustworthy, and objective evidence that is free from any type of human bias or unavoidable experimental influence. The most frequent research methods include official statistics, social surveys, questionnaires, and structured interviews. This evidence is often very useful at the time of making technical comparisons or summarising large data sets.

Interpretivism
Secondly, interpretivists can acknowledge the fact that evidence is often not wholly unequivocal or absolute and there is different meanings and interpretations behind data. Evidence and data is often transmitted trough people in the form of ideas, experiences and discourses. They prefer to interpret the world instead of taking for granted that there are only simple, straightforward and monochromatic facts. The idea that 'humans shape society' is fundamental to this approach and qualitative methods are most commonly used. These methods include case studies, participant observation, ethnography, and personal documents. Similar to positivists, they can appreciate the importance of ' validity' in studies and investigations. The methods described above are ideal in order to obtain in-depth insight into the lives of the respondents. This helps them gain a greater empathetic understanding of why the behave in the way that they do (context must be taken under consideration when analysing the actions taken by different groups of people). Often described as a more humanistic and conscientious approach to research.

Authenticity
Authenticity refers to whether evidence is genuine and of unquestionable origins.

Credibility
Credibility refers to whether evidence is error free and/or affected by preferences or biases that may skew the interpretation and collection of the evidence.

Evidence in Law, the Law of evidence
Evidence, from the latin evidentia which means proof, is a very important element in law. It is the “Information (in the form of personal or documented testimony or the production of material objects), tending or used to establish facts in a legal investigation”. The law of evidence or rules of evidence consideres the facts and determines what evidence can be considered in a trial. Evidence is very important in law, as it is the only way to judging a case. “Idem est non esse aut non probari” in latin, means that something that is not proof is the same as something that is not, showing the importance of proof and evidence in law.

History of evidence :

The notion of evidence has evolved during century.

•	Non rational source of evidence : During the Middle Age, evidence was based on supernatural powers. God was the highest judge. In fact, many systems of torture, involving fire or water were introduced to test the accused. If he succeeded, it means that he was innocent because God saved him.

•	Influence of Roman-Canonical law : During the 13th century, roman law introduced elements of common procedure. Evidence was evaluated on a hierarchical basis. Judge would be convinced by the number of witnesses in a case. It introduced the notion of confession, witnesses.

•	Modern Principles. Many modern principles appeared as the inquisitorital, which means that the judge searches for the facts, listens to witnesses and experts and examines documents and orders the taking of evidence. This applied for the criminal case. The accusatorial or adveracy principles appeared in civil and criminal cases. It means that parties and attorneys are primarly responsible for finding and presenting evidence. This is linked to the burdon of proof, meaning that it is the party that cites specific facts who has to prove these facts by evidence.

Sources of evidence :

There are five general sources of evidence :

1.	Real evidence (tangible things, such as a weapon)

2.	Demonstrative (a model of what likely happened at a given time and place)

3.	Expert evidence

4.	Documentary (a letter, blog post, or other document)

5.	Testimonial (witness testimony)

Different types of evidence :

•	Circumstantial Evidence: Evidence that tends to prove a factual matter by proving other events or circumstances from which the occurrence of the matter can be reasonably inferred.

•	Corroborating Evidence: Evidence that is independent of and different from but that supplements and strengthens evidence already presented as proof of a factual matter.

•	Hearsay: A statement made out of court and not under oath which is offered as proof that what is stated is true (usually deemed inadmissible)?

•	Exclusionary Rule: A rule of evidence that excludes or suppresses evidence obtained in violation of a defendant's constitutional rights.

Relevance and Irrelevance of evidence :

•	If the allegation of one party are not discuted by the other, the allegations are admissible so no proof is required. The proof is thus irrelevant. •	A proof has to be loyal and legal to be accepted. If the proof has been taken by illegal way, it would not be accepted.

Evidence in Social Sciences
Evidence is key in the social sciences to create powerful arguments, especially those that use several types of evidence. The four types of evidence used are :

 * 1) Anecdotal Evidence – this type of evidence is often used in journalism or in short reviews, where people wish to challenge someone else’s claim. It provides weak evidence to support an argument, especially if one uses a general anecdote to argue in favour of a narrow topic. It does, however, provide a strong counterexample for disproving an argument.
 * 2) Testimonial Evidence – the testimonies of credible experts or researchers can strongly strengthen an argument. It is, however, important to consider the implicit biases or opinions of each testimony. One testimony alone is thus insufficient evidence to support a claim. In the social sciences it provides the empirical evidence from participant observation and ethnographic research.
 * 3) Statistical Evidence – provides a generalised knowledge of a certain phenomenon. In social sciences, statistical evidence is often used by summarising trends in order to reduce the complexity of a certain issue. The diversity and accuracy of sampling highly impacts the credibility of statistical evidence and as they may vary it is important to provide a varied range of sources.
 * 4) Analogical Evidence – uses the act of comparison to a well established idea to explain a certain phenomenon. Although an analogy can help researchers create connections and illustrate new perspectives, it doesn’t provide hard evidence to prove nor establish an idea.  One must also be careful as analogies can be misinterpreted when badly executed.

Evidence in Art
Art can be used as evidence to learn about the past as well as about the 'spirit of an age'. When analysing art it is important to think about its authenticity, credibility and whether it is representative of the period it is depicting.

When analysing paintings of monarchs it is important to consider that the monarchs themselves commissioned the pieces and therefore that the depiction portrays them how they want to be perceived rather than being completely accurate and truthful. Although this may detract from the painting's credibility, it helps to inform us about the period, particularly on the sovereign's influence and the popular view of them. For example, in 'The Rainbow Portrait', Queen Elizabeth I is wearing a dress covered in eyes and ears. This tells us that she wanted England to know that she could hear and see everything, emphasising all the rebellions and plots she faced during her rule. Therefore, paintings can always be useful as evidence as long as the context behind the painting is taken into consideration.

Evidence can also be seen in modern art, particularly through what they reveal about social issues. Mexican printmaker Jose Guadalupe Posada's art provides insight on national politicians of his time. He depicts them as skeletons and skulls, highlighting the abuses of governments. This helps to highlight how art provides a lens through which to analyse both the past and the present through the evidence it depicts.

Evidence in Literary Criticism
Within the field of literary criticism, there are several different forms of evidence which can be utilised in justifying interpretations of a given text. However, the extent to which each of these forms of evidence is relevant to the field has been a matter of great controversy.

In their 1946 journal article ‘The Intentional Fallacy’, W.K. Wimsatt and Monroe Beardsley identified three types of evidence that may be of use to the literary critic:

Internal Evidence: This is ‘public’ evidence found within the text itself, primarily through the analysis of language, grammar and literary technique.

External Evidence: This is ‘private’ evidence that is not present within the text itself but is instead discovered through such means as personal letters and interviews in which the author of a work informs us of their intent and the context in which the work was written.

Intermediate Evidence: This is evidence pertaining to an author’s biography and the meanings that specific words have for that author.

However, the boundaries between these categories may not always be clear, with Wimsatt and Beardsley identifying the distinction between ‘external’ and ‘intermediate’ evidence as particularly problematic in this regard.

Proponents of the New Criticism movement in literary theory, Wimsatt and Beardsley concluded that external evidence should be discarded in literary criticism, arguing that, once published, a literary text belongs to the public and so authorial intent becomes irrelevant to the interpretation of the work.

This viewpoint was famously adopted by French literary critic Roland Barthes and espoused in his 1967 essay ‘The Death of the Author’, wherein he argued that both authorial intent and biographical text should be discarded from literary analysis and the text judged solely on its own merits.

However, there are also many who contest this approach. In his article “Roland Barthes’s Resurrection of the Author and Redemption of Biography”, J.C. Carlier argues that, contrary to popular belief, “The Death of the Author” is in fact a satirical work intended to highlight the importance of authorship and biography in literary analysis. Furthermore, there remain many defenders of intentionalist criticism, which views an understanding of authorial intent through the analysis of external evidence to be crucial in achieving accurate interpretations of texts.

Introduction
The notion of evidence within literature, and indeed within many of the arts, is rarely discussed and evidence is often dismissed as being subjective when discussing literature. In a field which is inherently creative, relying on emotion and imagination to craft a narrative as opposed to the quantitative thinking and logic where evidence is more frequently discussed, people often forget to consider how the issue of evidence can be applied to literature. This is a shame, as in fact evidence can be applied to the discipline in a range of contexts.

Perhaps most concretely, the concept of evidence-based literature can be applied to the discipline. This involves using literature as a device to collate data and form written pieces which can then be presented as evidence. In this regard, much of scientific evidence is built from evidence-based literature. The use of literature as a device to forward an argument is often overlooked, however within academia it is where literature is most used.

Evidence can also be applied to the field of literature in a more abstract manner. The use of evidence is also a literary device which is used to provide information to a reader. The literary device of evidence has also been adapted in many ways so it can be applied to a range of genres. Some of these examples will be explored below.

Evidence-Based Literature
As mentioned above, evidence-based literature demonstrates how much of the evidence put forward by researchers across all disciplines takes the form of literature. Literature is a powerful persuasive device and something that is elegantly written, well structured and lexically sound will be far more persuasive when presenting evidence as opposed to a random collection of data and statistics.

Medicine is a discipline which heavily relies on evidence-based literature. Within medicine there are three types of publication known as primary publications, secondary publications and tertiary publications. Primary publications take the form of articles and observations that were done close to the origin of the event. Secondary publications are usually a step or two removed from the original event and then tertiary publications take the form of encyclopedias, dictionaries or textbooks which summarise events.

Reference List:
http://www.literarydevices.com/evidence/

https://guides.lib.umich.edu/c.php?g=282799&p=1888545

https://research.library.gsu.edu/c.php?g=115558&p=868127

Evidence in Economics

 * Many say that Economics is not a hard science, as it formulates predictions and cannot be experimented. Economists are often excluded from the scientific society as they do not have the certainty that what they are modelling will fall through.
 * However, with the recent increase in data gathering, Economists have accumulated enough economic evidence to make models and predictions that come true.
 * Evidence is of the utmost importance in certain subfields of Economics, such as Health Economics, for effective policy decision making.
 * Today, central banks have shifted from using more traditional economics to evidence-based economics.
 * Evidence is at the source of any type of decision-making and policy-making in Economics.

Anecdotal Evidence
Belief in events arising from extraordinary powers based on experience of individual(s), such as the Catholic ritual of canonisation and beatification. These pieces of evidence are often adjudicated by religious authorities, and given meaning based on the authorities' interpretation of the claim. While interpretivists may find this evidence valuable in the meaning it has to people and society, as the waivers for time required to pass before one could be canonised by the church for Mother Teresa reflects the agendas of the stakeholders; positivists would take issue with the very subjective nature of this evidence, as it is interpreted by people with seemingly arbitrary judgement.

Signs
Belief in the will of one’s subconscious or a higher being encoded in a proxy, such as Tarot card reading, which claims to be a window into one’s inner soul ; or Fung Shui, which takes the likeliness of various symbols into its calculations of its fortune telling process.

Myths, Stories, and Legends
Evidence in religion often takes the form of one or more founding legends that illustrates and justifies the teachings of the particular religion. While they often claim authenticity as the truth passed down by religious figures, texts like the bible were written centuries after the alleged events that they are recording happened, and begs a reader to question the reliability of the writer, given how information could be lost or changed over time. This is especially true from a positivist perspective, since the evidence cannot be verified, tested, and cross-checked. While interpretivists may embrace the meanings that the religious has conferred upon these writings, they would still criticise the ambiguity of the writings as they do not really address human interest as their meanings are unclear.

Moreover, the writers may not be credible, since the texts like the bible are written by the followers of religious figures, who would likely be biased toward their idol. Moreover, the meanings of the writings are often unclear and open to interpretation. For example, fundamentalist christians would take the bible's narrative on Genesis very literally that the world was created by god in seven days, while conservative christians would believe that god may operate in a different reality, hence the the world could be created by god but not necessary in seven days on the human time scale, while liberal christians could interpret the story as a figurative piece of information that teaches christians about how god has created the world.

Evidence in sociology
Evidence in sociology is a complex issue because sociology is not a 'hard science ' meaning sociology does not solely rely on testable predictions, mathematical methods and the process of hypothesis followed by experiments and quantifiable data analysis. Sociology is defined as the study of the development, structure and functioning of human society. Human society is not constant, it is based on human behaviour which is not predictable and quantifiable therefore evidence can become problematic. In sociology, statistics are used to explore theories. For example, when looking at the role of gender in society, the sociological approach aims to answer the questions:

- Do social actors have a different role in society based on gender?

-What practices, assumptions and expectations besides biological differences, are associated with and which ones with females?

Studies are conducted on a population sample to draw conclusions about gender inequalities. For example, a study conducted by the Fawcett Society, a feminist charity, revealed that only 7% of Britons considered themselves 'feminists '. However, this study was done on a sample of population and therefore is not representative of the number of all Britons which identify as feminist. Furthermore, this statistic is given without the explanation of what feminism means to each participant in the survey. Therefore, this data does not prove anything and that is why evidence is an issue in sociology.

Scientfic Evidence, a contrast to human moralities

Science is one of the most important branches in which humans specialize themselves. It is the origin what we accept as truths. What gives science its legitimacy is evidence: experiments carried out to prove a formula, a theory, a hypothesis. These are vital to science, but can be contested under moral arguments. Religion is an argument: science is often seen as the opposite of religion. In fact, one leads to truth through evidence and the other has the truth without evidence. This is somewhat an issue as religion has been mainly a pillar for society. As of today, the main debates are related to climate change, immigration, gender issues and increasingly animal treatment. One of the main ways to get evidence in some sciences was and still is animal experimentation, so animal cruelty. Some scientists in the past became aware that animal could feel pain and have emotions, like Voltaire who opposed Descartes on his theory of the machine like animal. He explains in his Dictionnaire philosophique (1764) sarcastically how scientists, described as being barbaric immobilize a dog on a table to dissect him living to see the structures of his veins. He even proclaimed that treating animals like objects is a sassy contradiction to nature. Later on, some rules have been implemented to limit the sufferance of the animals as cruelty is against human morality. These were made official under the Animal Welfare Act in 1966 in the United States and 40 years later in the United Kingdom. Two of them are: minimise the suffering as much as possible in al experiments; if human benefits are gained which could not be obtained through another method. In fact, scientists are encouraged to follow the three Rs: Reduction, Refinment, Replacement. Reduction implies to reduce the number of animals used in experiments by improving data analysis and experimental techniques whilst sharing information with other researches. Refinement implies the best treatment possible for animals: less invasive techniques as well as better medical care and living conditions. Replacement implies replacing animals: with the help of a computer model, experimenting on cell cultures, studying human volunteers. Overall, these experiments are sometimes vital, especially concerning pharmaceutical products and researches. The nature of this evidence is often justified with the argument that the good that it brings to the humans outweighs the harm done to the animals tested on. However, this argument isn´t balanced: the out coming harm to the animals is certain whilst the harm done to humans without the animal testing is only theoretical. Furthermore, even though the laws make animal testing legal, this questions radically human moralities.

Arguing the thesis of Atheists
Many people ask themselves the question : Does God really exist ?

Atheists think that if there is no empirical evidence of the existence of God, then it must be concluded that it does not exist. However, by reasoning, thus, atheism commits an error of logic. This is called the "ignorance argument." The absence of evidence would be evidence to the contrary. But that's wrong. The lack of proof of the existence of a thing is not proof of its non-existence. If I have no evidence that a cat is walking in a Chinese village at the moment, I can not conclude that no cat is currently walking in a Chinese community. For atheism to claim to be a rational position, it would have to provide proof of the non-existence of God. But such a thing seems difficult to do because to be able to affirm that a thing does not exist, it would be necessary to be able to know the whole reality, including the imperceptible facts, and to note that it is not there. Atheism, therefore, does not provide a conclusive answer to the question of the existence of God.

In what does the universe indicate the existence of God?
The first clue is the fact that the universe had a beginning. Now everything that has a start has a cause. The universe must, therefore, have a compelling cause, capable of creating it. The second clue is the order in the universe, a mathematically describable order, and precisely adjusted to allow life. The fact is that life is very fragile and requires stringent conditions to develop. It would have been enough for the laws and fundamental constants of physics to be slightly different in order to make life impossible. In other words, among a multitude of possible universes, a tiny number of them are favorable to life. In so far as such a result is more difficult to attain by chance than by the fruit of intelligence, it appears much more probable that the universe is the result of an extraordinarily intelligent cause. Too many coincidences ? All of this thesis might not prove the existence of God but maybe the existence of a superior force ?