[APG Public List] Genealogical Proof Standard (Was The
reliabilityof federal census records for genealogi...)
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...
"...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...
More information about the APGPublicList