Is Herbert Butterfield's The Use Of Moral Judgment In History?

Improved Essays
As seen from the last chapter, historians led my Carr, Acton, Croce, and Irfan Habib, immunize their historical work against passing of moral judgements with reference to present standards of moral values. They realise that danger of imposing moral judgements by historians will imply that moral standards of the past people were inferior to those residing in the present. Thus, consciously or unconsciously, they will tend to demean the character of the historical figures and of the society which he is studying.
Other historians like Herbert Butterfield also out rightly rejects the use of morality in history. He says, "To make moral judgements in history is to engage in the most useless and unproductive of all forms of reflection". He makes assertion that though the historical people which the historian is studying may be morally responsible for their actions, but it is outside the job of the historian to evaluate them. Thus, Butterfield finds that historians are not trained to discover moral guilt and innocence of the past society, as they have no experience in dealing with such things.
…show more content…
As then, we will become more concerned about the historical subject itself rather than the historical evidence about him. Any opinion which prevents our ability to inquire more about the historical events and forestalls meticulous interpretation of historical facts will be against the criteria of historical craftsmanship. Also, this will hamper our ability to analyse fresh evidence which uncovers later. As there is lack of the totality of all the historical facts about any past event or person, therefore any moral judgement on the part of the historian will become outdated when new facts about that event or person are

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    One of the most prominent arguments in history is the role that morality should play in it. In the “Whig Interpretation of History,” Herbert Butterfield believes that moral judgments should not play a role in how historians narrate. Historian should refrain from passing judgements on the past actions and deeds of individuals. He criticizes the Whig’s interpretation of history because the judgments they make on events may be inaccurate due to their bias. He primarily disagrees with Lord Acton’s analysis of history because he judges through his own modern morality.…

    • 990 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    When we look at the atrocities of the past few centuries, it would seem inhumane to describe them in morally neutral terms. However, even about events of this kind, any moral judgment ought to be delivered as obiter dicta, not really part of the objective account of these events. A clean depiction of individuals and actions would naturally provoke readers into making their own moral judgments about the past, without the historian coercing their…

    • 1440 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    We should not live our lives dedicating them to morality, instead we should aim to be well-rounded and pursue both moral and non-moral virtues. One cannot be both a moral saint and well-rounded. Therefore, Wolf believes the life of a moral saint is undesirable because the moral saint does not have the ability to live an enjoyable and well-rounded life. 2. The first cause argument for g-d states that reality is one large sequence of causes, any…

    • 1417 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Neutrality refers to refraining from adopting a position on the subject matter. In writing an account of the past a historian may form an opinion. This opinion should not enter the historians work as it can sway the reader into formulating an opinion based on the historians'. When a historian adds his or her personal position on the subject matter this can be seen as a move from a historian to a journalist. Ideological considerations such as theological, philosophical, materialistic or any other intellectual bias might distort his vision that is, he is not free from his own…

    • 1798 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the book The Brother Karamazov, two of the major themes that are discussed in the chapter of Rebellion are the contrasting relationships between naturalism and Christianity in relation to suffering. To better understand the relationship between both of these differing beliefs, it is best understood from the main character’s perspective, who is Ivan. He does not endorse either naturalism or Christianity because he believes that neither of them are the solution to stop the suffering in the society. Also, he believes that they are both equally and morally unjust and lack accountability among its offenders and followers. A quote that helps us understand his reasoning for not endorsing Christianity in relation to suffering is that “{he}cannot accept an existence of a God that would allow such atrocities.”(Devita) From this particular quote, Ivan is indirectly doubting the existence of a God because of self-centered behavior among humans.…

    • 463 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    From a cultural standpoint, he opposed August Comte’s theory of positivism. Comte believed that using scientific methods would reveal constant social laws; however, Nietzsche passionately disagreed, for he believed that society was consistently changing, and therefore, an absolute truth could never be found. Comte’s theory is one that exhibits the dogmatism that Niezsche harshly criticized (Hunt, 791). Because something may be applicable now does not mean it will be as early as tomorrow. His opposition of positivism influenced his writing of Beyond Good and Evil, for he criticized the belief of inherent ideas, something he addressed in his book.…

    • 741 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Separateness Of Persons

    • 788 Words
    • 4 Pages

    According to Nozick this notion is flawed as “to use a person [for another’s benefit] does not sufficiently respect and take account of the fact that he is a separate person, that his is the only life he has. He does not get some overbalancing good from his sacrifice”. To put more plainly, the theory suggests that sacrificing the life of one person in order to maximise overall utility is still immoral, for that person is an individual in their own right and will not benefit from acting in this way. Utilitarianist’s fail to recognise that we are all separate beings in our own right. Instead it treats being’s as mere ‘repositories of…

    • 788 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Ethical egoism varies from other ethical positions since it proposes that the enthusiasm of others anything to never be an element in good choice making. An ethical egoist accepts that helping others is not an ethical activity and that they anything to help other people just seeing that it would offer an advantage over the long haul. If it does not better me I “morally” do not have to do it. So, if killing, torturing, or robbing someone will help me better myself then morally right. The book claims that ethical egoism cannot be true because it requires killing rape, or theft just because actions of this promote self- interest.…

    • 1259 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He claims that we could not will a universal law that permits lying, because such a law would be self-defeating and everyone would lie to each other and as a result, they would lack trust on each other. Therefore, he concludes that lying cannot be permitted. In his second argument, Kant is tempted to create exceptions to the rule against lying because in some instances, the consequences of not lying will be bad and the…

    • 1196 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Lastly, uninformed perceptions of others defeat all attempts to respect them as it doesn’t allow for the understanding or empathy of our cohorts. As humans, we continue to battle this natural urge to unknowingly define someone without any insight into their moral decision making, hindering our mental and moral growth. “Morality is simply the attitude we adopt towards people whom we personally dislike.” My personal interpretation of this Oscar Wilde quote is directly linked to respect and its moral relevance. The essence of morality is our reaction to…

    • 830 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays