In volume 7, the number 1 issue, of " Beyond Germanna ", there was an article by Nancy Upshaw entitled " What is Truth? ". This had been reprinted with permission from the " Bulletin of the Genealogical Forum of Oregon " with their permission. An edited version is included here:
"Truth is a matter of perspective. As a scientist, I have been trained to doubt all conclusions. Why? Completeness, lies, mistakes. This means constant digging for more evidence, that either falls in line with current assumptions, or which may cause a conflicting view of the event. There is a limit to this as with everything, and at some point you have to decide, "I have enough." Later, you may uncover material that reopens the case."In the absence of direct evidence, or, in addition to direct evidence, a compilation of circumstantial evidence is acceptable. Enough of it can be considered equivalent to direct proof if no conflicts exist to cause doubts. In most cases, one cannot prove the event happened; it can only be proven that is very likely that it happened.
"Genealogy is not a philosophy; it is an earnest search for facts using the scientific method. People may be philosophical about the subject, but the subject itself is not a philosophical one.
"If a tree falls in the forest and someone finds the remains of the tree rotting away, this is evidence that a tree once grew there. To a high degree of certainty, a tree once grew there, fell, and began to rot. Maybe the stump is still there and maybe the tree can be connected with the stump. This increases the odds of the tentative conclusion as opposed to the thesis that the tree was dumped there (which is possible). The evidence today is not first hand knowledge that a tree did grow there, but is reliable knowledge of the best sort.
"The most important thing for a researcher to do is to say, "I found a rotting tree lying on the ground in the forest. Also, I found at the larger end of the tree, a stump, which seemed to be an equal diameter and of a form which suggested it fit the end of the trunk exposed at that end. From the evidence, I surmise that the tree once grew here, then fell." To future readers of the researcher's work, it is as important to record the reasons for the assumption of a fact, as to record the fact itself. Later, if other evidence comes to light, than it can be meshed with existing known evidence or it can be examined for conflictual impact.
"There is always a likelihood of some degree that records have innocent mistakes in them. People do lie. Perhaps, even more commonly, people are misunderstood, or they misunderstand things themselves, and report these things as they (mis)understand them. This is why the search should be on searching for all of the evidence, not just the "surface" proof of a point. It is best to have multiple pieces of independent evidence to cross-verify each other.
"In the process of finding and evaluating evidence, truth will tend to survive and lies will tend to die. Given conflicting evidence, we must sort and search for more. Given weak evidence, we can form hypotheses, but not draw conclusions. Given strong evidence, we can form hypotheses and offer proposed conclusions. Usually, we fall somewhere in the middle."
We gratefully acknowledge the work of John Blankenbaker who published over 2,500 Germanna History Notes via the Germanna-L@rootsweb.com email list from 1997 to 2008. We are equally thankful to George Durman (Sgt. George) for hosting the list and republishing the notes via rootsweb.com.