Historians' Fallacies : Toward a Logic of Historical Thought (1970)

David Fischer’s book Historians' Fallacies: toward a logic of historical thought is one of the most helpful method focused historiographies I have read. It is also one of the most daring. Fischer, then a young PhD, gives examples of failures in reasoning pulled from the published writings of his more experienced fellows. I see myself rereading this book until his list of errors of logic are firmly lodged in my mind and I can recognize them in my own work as well as I do when he explains his examples.

If I had a complaint it would be that the book has not been updated in forty years. Most of the works he pulled his examples from are lost in the past. I am sure that, even after the publication of this book, logical fallacies have crept into current works.

On the other hand reading Fischer speak of America’s Viet Nam policy in the present tense reminded me of my youth and made me check the books publication date. Thanks to reading the book I know that just because Star Trek’s Mr. Spock was popularizing logical thought just a few years before the books publication Spock is not necessarily the reason it was written. ( )

Historians' Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought is a book you have to read if you plan to write history or journalism or anything that will be read by professionals. I'll go further still and claim that you don't know how to read or write professionally until you've read this book.

Historians' Fallacies is not a course in composition nor is it a course in logic -- though a course in logic is advisable for any writer. Historians' Fallacies goes beyond what we learn in logic courses to point up dozens of arcane fallacies -- flaws in thinking -- and how those flaws manifest themselves in real-world historiography. Another way to put it is that Historians' Fallacies is a course in applied logic for writers that illustrates what can happen if we fail to think critically about what we have written.

This book cautions readers that NOBODY thinks perfectly and that the best thinkers among us can still fall prey, blindsided by some flaw in their thinking that -- while it may be painfully obvious to others -- escaped their notice when they built their argument. Contrary to popular contention, "publish or perish" isn't always the rule in the academy. Historians' Fallacies shows us how easy it is to publish AND perish. Nobody wants to go there, so everybody ought to read this book. ( )

This book is an essential read for anyone considering a career as a historian, or even interested in the historical process and wanting to be able to look at historical writing more critically.

I'll agree with the commenter that said the book dragged in places--by the end you can definitely tell he had a length requirement to meet! Still, the first 75% of the book is incredibly useful, even if you just want to be able to shout "Fallacy!" during debates with friends. ;) ( )

An essential work for any historian or social scientist. This book may not be what you need to learn how to write, but it is certainly about how not to do it.