Research Paper on:
A Comparison of Herodotus and Fischer.

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
writers. In this regard, we will be examining Herodotus Histories, and putting them under the magnifying glass of professor David Hackett Fischer, and his arguments about historical research in his  book, Historians Fallacies. Before even launching into comparisons and contrasts, the writer must provide an overview of what each writing entails  - it doesnt need to be anything lengthy, but its a good jumping-off point for the reader and lets him/her know what the essay or report will entail. As an  aside, the terms "essay," "report" and "paper" will be used interchangeably throughout this particular assignment. The first step of the student/writer is  to pinpoint arguments throughout Fischers book, and to summarize them as briefly and succinctly as possible. For example, one argument that Fischer makes is that history research is no good  unless it is released to the general population. "Professional historians must hold something more than private conversations with themselves," Fischer says in his book. (Fischer 316). In other words, the  use of history, as history, requires new strategies, skills and projects, and historians should be on the outlook for new ways for information dissemination, as well as information collection (Fischer  316). The idea that historical research and results should be confined only to a few learned scholars, as far as Fischer is concerned, just is not efficient or effective (Fischer  316). For one thing, knowledge, in a way, is power - historical knowledge, particularly, can help people come to grips with troublesome current times. For example, in using Fischers argument  that historical knowledge is "a partial remedy" (Fischer 316), one only needs to examine the whole concept of global warming. On one side of the issue are the environmentalists, who