History And Science: History Vs. Science

History is the study of the past, particularly on how it relates to humans. (Anderson, 2014) Traditionally, historians record past events and also attempted to answer historical questions through the study of written documents and oral accounts. In general, the sources of historical knowledge that historians consult can be separated into three distinct categories: what is written, what is said, and what is physically preserved. (Lemon, 1995) However, History does not rest solely on memory but on critical understanding. It is difficult to distinguish the truth and determine, from many differing accounts, which is most factually accurate. Those who know only by tittle-tattle the role of criticism are aware of its use in historical circles. And yet this is only part of the task of historical studies. (Ranke, 2010) As a result, Ibn Khaldun invented a scientific method to the study of history, and he often referred to it as his "new science". (Franz Rosenthal, 1967) As Ranke wrote, “Just as science endeavours to press on to the inner sources of nature from which all things spring, so it is with history.” (Ranke, 2010) As such, History is a science as it attempts to formulate a hypothesis of the past based on empirical historical evidence. However, History and Science differs on their purpose and reliability. Despite these differences, History ultimately aims to

While the main task of the historian is to provide conceptualizations and factual descriptions of events of the past, their inferences are often limited to current evidences and modern-day interpretation of human behaviourism. Therefore, historians often shows biasness in their writings despite trying to be fair. However, Science remains fair as the accounts can never be prejudiced due to personal emotions, as Science is a study built on physical laws that were empirically