Originally posted by Stromprophet:
I just don't think it's that much work. I view all such classes required as easy for a B.S. degree, a masters, and even a doctarate as childs play for anyone.
I've always been good in English and Public speaking, I aced out of the first 2 levels of college English as well as speech class and didn't have to take either of them.
What kind of classes did you have to take?
Are there a certain amount of other credits needed? Any sort of science credits? I bet pyschology is required, as well as many political science, and history classes, possibly writing.
You know, it is not the first time I heard this kind of comments.
What kind of classes I had? 2 types in 3 occasions
1) Thesis Project: To help beginners in masteral studies to determine clearly our object, problematic, hypothesis, methodology, sources to be use, adequation between methodology and sources, key concepts, etc. The far most important course of all
2-3) Seminaries. Around a theme, we wrote a dissertation (a demonstration of an hypothesis...all the convential steps in a scientific work) in analysing/criticizing (constructive!) each works of the group (5-10 students)
The rest of the credits were used and are used to the 'production' of a thesis (100-200 pages). The work done in course 1) was very useful.
Of course, all the traditional scientific method is followed in my work:
problematic, hypothesis, methodology, demonstration of hypothesis, quotes with reference, introduction, conclusion...
The difference with students in physics, maths, is we can't be totally exact. I explain: History is not an exact science. It is a science of demonstration with shades(nuances). Never black or white but alway grey!
For example, my object, Arthur Sauvé, the politician, was very attached to French-Canadian traditions. He was a conservative nationalist for that. But, it is not finished! I learned that he accepted the modernity and social progress only if traditions would be preserved. I was obliged to consider the nuance. (In fact, I was more happy to find that than 'obliged').
For this 'chemistry', trying to weigh the yeas and the neas of the justification of an argument or not, it seems artisanal. But it is only a false image. It is necessary.
And I don't tell you about the methods historians can use from politican science, social psychology (what I did--- Content Thematical analysis) because I am studying the political thought of an human being.
I hope that will 'enlighten' you
R.F.
------------------
'On ne cherche point à sauver les écuries quand le feu est à la maison.'--- Minister of Marine of Louis XV (1759) about the dispatch of troops to New France during the Seven Years War. At the end, NF was give up to Great-Britain.
It will be my duty to prevent this error!
