# Is History Based Upon the Scientific Method?

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/is-history-based-upon-the-scientific-method/5683>\
**Category:** Side Conversation\
**Created:** [April 6, 2019, 3:28am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/is-history-based-upon-the-scientific-method/5683 "2019-04-06T03:28:49Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![cdods](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/94ad74/32.png) [@cdods](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/cdods)\
**Post date:** [April 6, 2019, 11:45am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/is-history-based-upon-the-scientific-method/5683/5 "2019-04-06T11:45:47Z")

</div>

> [@Do PS Members Believe in Scientism?](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/do-ps-members-believe-in-scientism/5667/64):
>
> > Most of history seems to be of assessing many written sources, assigning how credible each are based on various criteria (linguistic, literary, cultural, archaeological, etc.), and trying to put together an “objective” picture based on these.
> 
> That is the scientific method.

I was thinking about this very thing question last night. Does the use of the scientific method imply that one is doing science? There is at least significant differences in the ability to test the conclusions that are drawn using the scientific method in the soft sciences vs the hard sciences. As a layman I’m must more skeptical of conclusions in the soft sciences than in the hard sciences.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/is-history-based-upon-the-scientific-method/5683)._