I love taking the plastic off my new edition of the National
Genealogical Society Quarterly (NGSQ) and diving into the mysteries that unfold
in the presented research. I admit that this is not for everyone. I like to learn
about strategies that others use to find information or facts about those they
are researching. I love the maps, graphs and charts the authors use to help
convey information. I also love learning about history and the unique lives
that our predecessors have lived. I also think it is intimidating to see the
evidence of the reasonably exhaustive searches that genealogists go through to
find information that help to paint the picture of facts about the person they
are researching.
The Editor’s Corner for the December 2020
publication about Claims and Assertions has caused me to think about the
different types of facts we use to prove our theories about our research. At
the head of the editorial, they quote Friedrich Nietzche “Facts do not exist,
only interpretations.”
The editors, Nancy A. Peters and Allen R. Peterson, use
examples from an article in the issue to show how a genealogical conclusion was
made based on compiled family members’ claims. These claims were later proved
false using deeds and probate records that may not have been available to the
original researcher. They also explain that the person in question was
deliberately obscuring his identity, but evidence proves his true identity.
I know in my own experience that relying on family members’
claims led to a brick wall and not until I broadened my research did I find the
ancestor. I also found that my relative had changed his identity and left
behind a wife and children, with no sign of divorce. In later records this
first wife listed herself as a widow. I can draw conclusions about this
ancestor, but I am not sure I still know all of the facts or truth about him.
The NGSQ editorial makes a good point and to a certain
extent I agree. However, I think I
disagree with Nietzche and the use of his quote in the editorial. I am not
convinced that conclusions and facts are always the same.
 |
| Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900) |
Facts and Truth
Nietche’s quote, “facts do not exist, only interpretations,”
is reflected in our current politically charged world. Facts are rooted in
truth. I know that many people say that truth is subjective but there are facts
and truths that exist. It is sad in modern society I need to delineate between
facts and actual facts or truth and actual truth. We are all born is a fact and
we all die is a fact. Where we were born or may die may not be known but can be
proved. You cannot interpret being born.
It is both the truth and a fact that I was born in Provo,
Utah. Not only do I have a certificate of birth and eyewitness accounts but the
facts that I lived in Provo, attended schools there, and have relatives who
lived and are still living there all collaborate that I was born in Provo.
It is a fact that my children were all born in Ogden, Utah.
It is true they were all born in Mckay-Dee Hospital, but it is a fact that they
were not all born in the same hospital. Over time McKay-Dee Hospital has been
in three different locations along Harrison Boulevard in Ogden. In March of
2002, the newest facility was opened about six blocks south of the previous
location. My wife and our three oldest children were all born in the same older
building, but our youngest three children were all born in the newer building.
Relativism
Relativism seems like a word that fits well within the world
of genealogy and family history. However,
the theory has much less to do with relatives than it does to a belief. The
philosophy of relativism holds that each person is free to choose for
themselves what is truth or fact, that their point of view or standpoint can
alter the way facts or truth are seen or to be believed. This myopic viewpoint
lacks intellectual insight and relies more on emotion or feelings than accuracy
and verity.
Over the last few years, I have noticed my children picking
up a new conversational terminology. I have even caught myself saying it a few
times. When I was younger, I would say things like, “I think that the sky is bluer
today,” or “I think the snow is deeper this year.” With the new terminology I
hear them say, “I feel like the snow is deeper this year,” or “it feels like he
was born earlier in the year.” This difference in terminology seems small at
first but the underlying emotion of the thought reflects the relativism that is
pervasive in our modern culture.
Thinking based on emotion has led to many social issues that
blur truth and fact and could affect our field of genealogy. People now feel
their gender is different than a biological truth of fact. Others even feel
that gender is not real but a construct of thought. Marriage has gone from an
institution to a piece of paper. A two-parent household is considered by some
as a form of white privilege instead of a societal norm. Even societal norms
feel wrong so they must not be true.
I fear the loss of truth and fact if relativism becomes as
common in family history and genealogy as it is in politics and morality.
Genealogical Proof Standard
Scholars and professionals in genealogy use proof to draw
conclusions.
This has been standardized using five conditions. A reasonably exhaustive
search, complete citations, analysis and correlation of data, resolution of
conflicts, and a written proof summary or conclusion.
Even the most technical and skilled proof summary is more of
a probability than truth. The proof can contain facts and truths, but the
result is a theory or conclusion. Truth and facts do not change but the theory
or proof can. Proof is not truth or fact; proof is a standard of reliability
and quality of the conclusion drawn.
Because of the analysis and correlations step of the
genealogical proof standard I can see an avenue for relativism to creep into
proof. If we project the emotions of relativism of the modern day into the
analysis of sources, information and evidence of the past our proof summaries and
conclusions will become even less probable and farther from fact or the truth.
This brings us back to the editorial, they expertly discuss
genealogical conclusions, proof standards, and examples, however I think the
Nietzsche quote that framed the article would have been more truthful or
factual if it read, “genealogical conclusions do not exist, only interpretations.”
Unless we add an additional standard of proof, may we all hold truth and fact
with a higher regard than feelings or emotion.
