[APG Public List] Genealogical Proof Standard (Was The reliabilityof federal census records for genealogi...)

LBoswell laboswell at rogers.com
Wed Nov 4 08:16:53 MST 2009


The research approach represented by those five steps is an excellent one 
(if a bit of tinkering with wording was done).

As a guide to research, I've no problem with the concepts behind the gps 
(except for above issue).

My thought is that amounts to genealogicaly heresay, because I argue that  a 
"proof standard" isn't necessary, that it can't offer any proven benefit 
justifying it's continued use, and may in fact accomplish the opposite of 
what is intended.  If it becomes the focus instead of the research at hand 
(meeting the gps), for example.  There cannot be an objectively applied 
standard in this manner.

but I just mention this in passing. I don't think this is the right list to 
do it on. I'm house-cleaning the TheoryGen list, sweeping everything out, 
maybe might be a good positive subject for that list.  For anyone willing to 
discuss it in a positive, respectful way...

Larry
   Elizabeth's:
  "...the GPS is a five-step process. The utilization of a range of records 
is just the first step in that process. The questions on which Jay has 
quoted or paraphrased you, above, are the type of questions you should be 
asking about each statement in each record you use, of whatever type.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: ../attachments/20091104/12bf9d3a/attachment.html


More information about the APGPublicList mailing list