[META]It seems like there's a push back in the study of history against using data and objective analysis? Am I imagining this? And if not, are there good reasons?

by Erpp8

I've noticed when people discuss sensitive topics, they avoid trying to use any kind of data or objective analysis to answer their questions and instead pick one or two accounts are treat them as representative. Isn't a few anecdotes not enough to get a full picture. Unless you can corroborate that account with a wider view?

The example in mind is a recent question about the nutrition of slaves in the US and the top answer brushed aside a previous analysis and cited Fredrick Douglas' account. I'm not doubting anything Douglas said, but isn't one account not enough to say that all slaves lived the same way?

jschooltiger

There isn't a pushback against using data and objective analysis; the issue is that objectivity doesn't exist (also see, I, II, III and so forth. But because you don't think slavery was all that bad, you've chosen to post a leading META thread that makes an assumption that is not supported by evidence. You might want to do some research before you post here again.