A humanities scholar rebuts criticisms of the “conceptual penis” paperhttps://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2017/05/21/a-humanities-scholar-rebuts-criticisms-of-the-conceptual-penis-paper/ …
-
-
Only if it is based on archaeological data
-
On data, yes. Mine focuses mostly on manuscripts & early books, legal & church records.
-
In that case it is basic to reproduce these records and not to try to reach to any ideological conclusion about them
-
That's basic, yes. Here I produced an edition of a 16th century anatomical broadsheet & gave context. http://helenpluckrose.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/the-woman-1540-anatomical-fugitive.html …
-
More often, I focus on religious writing & there an ideology does exist & can be discussed & understood better.
-
Understanding how people thought & lived & providing evidence of this is not pseudoscience. Limitations of knowledge admitted
-
An evidence-based history is a science
-
In the etymological sense of the stem 'sci' pertaining to empirical knowledge.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.