{"id":1145,"date":"2015-09-17T13:12:02","date_gmt":"2015-09-17T13:12:02","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/?p=1145"},"modified":"2015-09-17T13:12:02","modified_gmt":"2015-09-17T13:12:02","slug":"proving-genealogical-proof","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/?p=1145","title":{"rendered":"Proving Genealogical Proof"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>[reposted from our old blog site of 15 July 2013]<\/p>\n<p>The word &#8220;proof&#8221; confuses some genealogists and scares others. The confusion centers on the fact that different disciplines and occupations define &#8220;proof&#8221; differently for their own uses. Researchers coming from different pre-genealogy backgrounds may assume that everyone defines and uses proof in the way in which they are familiar. The fear comes from negative experiences with creating an &#8220;argument&#8221; for a composition class, constructing geometric proofs in a high school geometry course, or being on the &#8220;negative end&#8221; of &#8220;proof&#8221; in some legal sense.<\/p>\n<h3>\nNothing to Fear<\/h3>\n<p>There&#8217;s no reason to fear genealogical proof. There&#8217;s no genealogy police sitting behind the leaves on the genealogy tree waiting for you to speed past. You won&#8217;t be arrested for incomplete citations. An understanding of proof can assist any genealogist into better research and better conclusions&#8211;and we all want that.<\/p>\n<h3>What is Proof?<\/h3>\n<p>Genealogists, generally speaking, define &#8220;proof&#8221; as that written argument supporting a specific conclusion. Proofs written for a scholarly journal better not contain comma splices&#8211;whatever they are. Proof written for your own immediate use can contain comma splices and other grammar mistakes (although spelling errors make you look <i>careless <\/i>and that will impact how others judge your work). Proof written for a genealogical journal needs to make sense. Proof written for your own use needs to make sense. A genealogical proof argument is a clearly written and carefully constructed analysis of information (evidence). That&#8217;s the part where it has to actually make sense. \u00a0Evidence used has been obtained as a part of comprehensive research. That is, you&#8217;ve not overlooked obvious sources of information that could answer your question, you&#8217;ve even looked in some unexpected places for information, and you have also discussed information that is inconsistent with your conclusion and explained why you think that &#8220;other information&#8221; is incorrect. You cannot just pick one document that it consistent with your point and say that&#8217;s &#8220;proof.&#8221; It is not. Part of creating a proof is discussing all the evidence you have found.<\/p>\n<p>Is it difficult? No. Do some people make it sound harder than it is? Yes. Personally speaking, genealogical &#8220;proof&#8221; is &#8220;easier&#8221; in post-1850 families. Before then, records and sources are not always as clear cut.<\/p>\n<p>A genealogical conclusion, supported by genealogical proof, can always be revised if new information comes to light.<\/p>\n<h3>My job defined &#8220;proof&#8221; differently<\/h3>\n<p>Mine sure does. In mathematics, once there is a proof that is based on a set of assumptions and sound reasoning, the result is proven. Period. There may be additional ways to prove the result, but the result itself does not change. Mathematicians don&#8217;t look for &#8220;evidence&#8221; in the ways that other sciences do. When I use the word &#8220;proof&#8221; in a genealogical sense, I have to constantly remind myself that I am not using it in the mathematical sense. And I have to remember, that if I want to play with other genealogists, I need to be using the proof concept in the same way that they use the proof concept.<\/p>\n<h3>But my definition of proof is better.<\/h3>\n<p>No it is not. It is different and it may work for you and your discipline. Within your own personal work, you can define proof differently. That is up to you. But if you want to &#8220;play genealogy at a certain level,&#8221; you will have to follow the general concept of &#8220;genealogical proof.&#8221; And it really isn&#8217;t that hard. Genealogy proof, in a nutshell, can be revised if new evidence is located, and is the result of looking at all appropriate sources, extracting relevant pieces of information and creating a well-written, clearly reasoned conclusion. That concept isn&#8217;t hard. What&#8217;s hard is doing that in a 1690 era Virginia family that left few records. There the difficulty is not the proof itself&#8211;but the time period and the location. And that&#8217;s often the difficulty&#8211;constructing a &#8220;good&#8221; proof requires a knowledge of the time period, the location, and the relevant records&#8211;and that&#8217;s not something a researcher can develop overnight.<\/p>\n<h3>Summary<\/h3>\n<p>Some people do make genealogical proof too difficult. Others argue with the definition itself. I wrote genealogical &#8220;proof&#8221; long before I became familiar with the academic concept. Other did as well. That&#8217;s because sound research, soundly analyzed, and soundly reasoned is the goal&#8211;no matter what you call it.<\/p>\n<p>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;<\/p>\n<p>You can read <a href=\"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/?p=450\">some thoughts on the Board for Certification of Genealogical\u00a0<em>Standards Manual<\/em> or<\/a>\u00a0posts I&#8217;ve written about\u00a0<em><a href=\"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/?tag=evidence-explained\">Evidence Explained<\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>[reposted from our old blog site of 15 July 2013] The word &#8220;proof&#8221; confuses some genealogists and scares others. The confusion centers on the fact that different disciplines and occupations define &#8220;proof&#8221; differently for their own uses. Researchers coming from different pre-genealogy backgrounds may assume that everyone defines and uses proof in the way in [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1145","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1145","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1145"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1145\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1145"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1145"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rootdig.genealogytipoftheday.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1145"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}