Blog Article/Post Caveat (Read First Please: Click the Link)
(Historical Research: The historical method is employed by researchers who are interested in reporting events and/or conditions that occurred in the past. An attempt is made to establish facts in order to arrive at conclusions concerning past events or predict future events.)
Everyone, yours truly included, have their perception as to karate’s history. If you wish to enjoy and resonate with true historical knowledge toward karate’s history there are some steps to follow and information sources you would want to make it true, valid and factual.
First, isolate the problem, i.e., that karate is of Okinawan origins, etc.
Second, collect source materials that include both a primary source and a secondary source.
Third, evaluate the source materials.
Fourth, formulate a hypotheses
Fifth, report and interpret your findings
Lets start with the second, primary sources of information covering direct outcomes of events or the records of eyewitnesses, etc. shall consist of:
First, original documents
Second, relics
Third, remains
Fourth, artifacts
As to the secondary sources of information that is provided by a person or persons who did not directly observe the event, object, or condition shall consist of:
First, textbooks
Second, Encyclopedias
Third, newspapers
Fourth, periodicals
Fifth, a review of research and other references
Then you want to look toward external criticisms where those person or persons ask if the evidence under consideration is authentic. The researcher checks to the genuineness or validly of the source.
- Is it what it appears or claims to be?
- Does the witness agree with other witnesses?
Then one shall seek out an internal criticism where after the source is authenticated,
- ask if the source is accurate”
- Was the writer or creator competent, honest, and unbiased?
- How long after the event happened until it was reported?
- Does the witness agree with the other witnesses?
Generally, this is a fundamental toward researching and reporting historical data but there is more such as:
- Did the person establish the genuineness of the document or relic?
- Did the person check the content of a source of information?
- Did the person evaluate through obtaining a:
- Statement of hypotheses
- Exteranal and Internal criticism of sources
- Observation and experimentation
- Technology terminology
- Generalization and prediction
- Did the person take stock of the advantages of:
- That the research is not physically involved in the situation under study
- That there is no danger of experimenter-subject interaction
- That the documents are located by the researcher, data is gathered, and conclusions are drawn out of sight.
I can tell you that in most cases the research and references and findings of most who claim historical persons don’t even start to use the information presented in this article. This is why I make my caveat, because I am interested in history and background of karate but I am not a qualified historical researcher and I can say I would not, could not and have not found enough information that meets even one third of the requirements to say that what I believe and find truthful as far as can be humanly determined is not historical in nature but merely my thoughts, ideas, theories and finally beliefs.
Yet, all those who adamantly, except in a few rare cases, say they have the history and traditions of karate from Okinawa actually only have information to support their personal beliefs as to the origins of karate. Especially as it pertains to any particular system or style.
Now, understand, that my presentation is merely an outline and one must define each part and find the definitions and credentials that make the sum of those parts a whole that is valid and supportable with facts through written historical documents, periodicals and so on for just one or two alone don’t make for historical fact.
Very, very few will take the time, effort and sweat equity (mental sweat equity that is) to find true valid backed up facts as the above would if you did the work over just accepting things because of the “Expert Sources.” Question, are they truly historical expert sources?
Additional Information on Historical Research:
There are four major methods that researchers use to collect historical data. These are archival data, secondary sources, running records, and recollections.
1. The archival data, or primary sources, are typically the resources that researchers rely most heavily on. Archival data includes official documents and other items that would be found in archives, museums, etc.
2. Secondary sources are the works of other historians who have written history.
3. Running records are ongoing series of statistical or other sorts of data, such as census data, ship's registries, property deeds, etc.
4. Finally recollections include sources such as autobiographies, memoirs or diaries.
four stages; systematic qualitative comparative historical studies:
1) develop the premise of the investigation, identifying events, concepts, etc., that may explain the phenomena;
2) choose the case(s) (location- nation, region) to examine;
3) use what Theda Skocpol has termed as "interpretive historical sociology" and examine the similarities and the differences; and
4) based on the information gathered, propose a causal explanation for the phenomena.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative_historical_research
http://www.okstate.edu/ag/agedcm4h/academic/aged5980a/5980/newpage19.htm
Bibliography (Click the link)
No comments:
Post a Comment